Big business bucks levy plan

BY NICHOLAS BOYACK
Last updated 13:31 16/03/2010

Relevant offers

Hutt News

Owners told to keep dogs away from signposted areas of Hutt River Bus access debate likely to spark lively Thursday meeting Hutt woman Shazly Rasheed fashions a brilliant career Hutt Valentine's wooing included treasure hunt Lodge owner offers Baring Head access deal City has 'failed its heritage responsibilities' Rider's mother says motorists' toots, speed spook horses Hutt dancers shine at Australian dancing showcase Local is swept up in debate over stream bank planting Ranger keen to get to bottom of seat theft

Hutt City Council looks to be buying a fight with two of the biggest retailers in the city over a targeted rate for the central business district.

There are currently 350 businesses paying $9 million in rates and the council wants to know if downtown retailers and other firms are willing to pay a further $350,000 to promote Lower Hutt as a destination.

Councillors last week heard from Callum Wilkinson, representing Harvey Norman.

He said his firm had invested over $40 million in its building and strongly opposed the special rate.

Harvey Norman was already paying high rates, which were hurting the financial viability of its tenants, he said.

The company had its own marketing strategy to bring people to its Lower Hutt shop and did not favour working with other retailers.

There was no evidence that "broad" marketing campaigns, which the levy would fund, would bring shoppers to the Hutt.

If other retailers want to attract people from outside the Hutt, then it should be up to individual retailers to devise a strategy, he said.

The firm would oppose any move to bring in a levy and he said it already did enough to support the local economy.

Council chief executive Tony Stallinger said Queensgate owners Westfield had told him it would not support the levy.

Under the proposal, the 13 largest businesses, including the Westfield mall and Harvey Norman, would pay most of the levy.

Councillor Deborah Hislop said that seemed inherently unfair and she could understand why Mr Wilkinson was not happy.

A fairer system of payment should be found as large retailers already did a lot of marketing that benefitted Hutt City, and it appeared they would fight the proposal.

The levy is supported by Business Hutt Valley and CBD+, which presented a report to council.

In order to get the green light, the proposal needs to be supported by 70 per cent of retailers.

Councillor Max Shierlaw said the BHV/CBD+ report lacked detail and robust analysis.

It claimed retailers would benefit but provided no evidence; the council would look silly sending it out for consultation, he said.

"I do not support us sending out nebulous reports for consultation. It does not present a good look for council."

Harvey Norman, Briscoes, Rebel Sport and Westfield already spent large amounts on promotion and making them pay a levy would result in them supporting other retailers, while getting little benefit themselves, Mr Shierlaw said.

But councillor Roger Styles said that most businesses would only be paying an extra $10 per week.

Ad Feedback

At this stage all the council is doing is finding out if retailers are in support.

Councillor David Bassett said that Mr Shierlaw was right to doubt the scheme, but all the council was doing was getting a "feel" for the level of support among businesses.

Retailers needed to understand that if they supported the levy, it was likely to be a permanent arrangement.

The council agreed to include the proposal in the draft annual plan.

- Hutt News

1 comment
Post a comment
Ian McKinnon   #1   10:02 am Mar 17 2010

How many bureaucrats will be employed at the ratepayers' expense to oversee this rort? Come on voters, time to stop this exploitation of the business community. It is hard enough to make a dollar and pay wages, without supporting the ineptitudes of council bureaucrats, with further taxes. By the way, what is the level of staffing within council, and what has the increase been in the past three years? If only principal ratepayers were voting there would be none of this as we would be rid of the incompetent wasters.

Post comment


Required

Required. Will not be published.
Registration is not required to post a comment but if you , you will not have to enter your details each time you comment. Registered members also have access to extra features. Create an account now.


Maximum of 1750 characters (about 300 words)

I have read and accepted the terms and conditions
These comments are moderated. Your comment, if approved, may not appear immediately. Please direct any queries about comment moderation to the Opinion Editor at blogs@stuff.co.nz
Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content