A disgruntled business owner in Sechelt came to council to express his concern with how the Sechelt Downtown Business Association (SDBA) planned to collect a $70,000 Business Improvement Area levy from property owners within the SDBA’s boundaries.
In order to stop the levy, owners of properties with businesses on them in the downtown area were required to submit a petition against the levy. Over 50 per cent of property owners representing over 50 per cent of the total value of properties within the SDBA area had to submit a petition to quash it.
Business owners had until the end of the day on April 3 to submit their petitions.
Mike Evans of Oceanview Realty Ltd. appeared as a delegation before council on April 5 to express his concerns with the process. “The so-called petition against method – I was unaware that this method even existed. It’s sort of like negative option billing,” Evans said. “It may be permissible under the Community Charter but it’s an awful way to go about something like this.”
He explained many business owners don’t own their properties in downtown Sechelt so they literally have no say in approving or denying the levy (as only property owners can submit petitions); however, the costs are passed on to business owners through their rental agreements.
The overall levy this year also increased from $44,000 to $70,000 at the request of the SDBA, which uses the funds to promote businesses in the downtown core and put on events that bring people to the area.
“It’s a 56 per cent increase and it comes at a poor time,” Evans said, noting many businesses in Sechelt are suffering and can’t afford to pay more in taxes and levies.
He said he felt the process was “sneaky” and asked council to stop it from moving forward.
Mayor Bruce Milne noted the levy was not a council initiative, but rather a levy that comes directly from the SDBA. “We’re absolutely neutral on this,” he said. “It’s interesting that on the one hand you think it’s a sneaky way to put it through. There are other comments that council was trying to block it because it was a negative approach.”
Evans said he was directing his comments to council rather than the SDBA because “I understand you have the power to stop it.”
Corporate officer Jo-Anne Frank said district staff was “still in the process right now of going through the petitions to certify the number of petitions received,” and she “will be bringing a report forward to the April 19 regular council meeting reporting on the results and next steps.”
Milne noted that, “even though the petition is closed, there has been far more concern this time,” and added, “council will look at that very closely regardless of what the results are.”
