SID Advisory District Presents Final Report

At Wednesday’s Board of Trustees meeting, the Special Improvement District (SID) Advisory Committee presented six months worth of research and meetings in the form of a 228 page report.  Robyn Fields, chairperson of the committee and owner of , a jewelry store, presented the report to the BOT.

The committee was enacted by a resolution in January 2011 and began meeting in April.  They have been meeting bi-weekly since then and had at . 

Fields started out by explaining that the committee was prepared to recommend that an Improvement District be enacted in South Orange.  In the executive summary of the report, the committee states:

“First and foremost, the Committee believes downtown South Orange has room for growth and improvement. While our downtown currently has its strengths, we are concerned that if nothing is done to bring us to the next step, we will lose businesses and have greater trouble filling vacancies as a result, thus creating a very real opportunity for backslide.”

After stating that the whole committee agreed that doing nothing was not a “viable solution,” Fields went over a list of alternatives to enacting a SID, stating that none were superior to an improvement district. 

“This clearly solves the issues,” Fields said about a SID.  “It’s funded through an assessment, and is led by business and property owners.”

According to the report, the boundaries of the Improvement District were identified as including properties along both sides of:

• South Orange Ave. from Prospect St. to Church St.
• Scotland Rd. to Taylor Pl.
• Taylor Pl. to Vose Ave.
• Vose Ave., from Taylor Pl. to South Orange Ave.
• Valley St., from South Orange Ave. to Third St.
• Third St. to Sloan St.
• Sloan St., from South Orange Ave. to Third St.

In August 2011, the committee authorized a survey to be sent to businesses on their e-mail list.  The survey was responded to by 59 businesses located in the district.  74% of those surveyed said that they do not want to pay additional costs for services the SID may provide.  22% said they were willing to pay for additional services with only 9 business owners saying they would pay over $200 a year.

The report stated that there “appeared to be a small, organized effort to influence the survey results.”  The report went on to blame “two business owners who gave exactly the same answer to an open-ended question.”  The report called some answers ““campaign-like” and not particularly germane to the question being asked: That is, in answer to an open-ended question the written response was “no SID” or “we don’t need a SID.””

The committee presented a five year projection of the amount businesses would be assessed and the budget that the district would spend.  The majority of the examples provided by the committee showed businesses paying over $1,000 a year by the fifth year. 

The budget presented shows the district receiving an income of roughly $208,500 a year.  However, that is based on projections of successful grants, sponsorships and contributions.  In addition, the budget shows that $100,000 will be given by the Village for downtown services. 

 As for expenses, the projected budget shows that every penny would be spent.  The majority of the expenses would go towards administration costs, with the executive director making $65,000 with an additional $5,000 in goal based incentives and up to $13,000 spent in taxes and benefits.  Rent is expected to be $13,500 unless the district can find a donated office.  Also $25,000 would be spent in yearly office costs.

Operating costs include line items such as advertising, marketing and downtown décor.  The district projects to spend $5,000 on business training courses to help owners learn new skills.  $60,000 would go towards three “part-time ambassadors” that would be contracted to be cleanup staff.  In addition, another $15,000 would be spent on project-based larger cleanup or landscaping projects.

The committee recommended a “sunset clause” which would automatically dissolve the SID three years after it starts.  However, if the businesses choose to keep it, they may vote to do so.  It is proposed that the businesses shall each receive 1 vote per 0.1% of the district.  This means the larger businesses will have a weightier vote.

 Fields closed the presentation by bringing up the other towns around South Orange that have improvement districts.  She said a SID is needed if South Orange would like to be like those towns.

 “South Orange is consistently compared to towns that we aspire to emulate,” said Fields.  “Those towns are Millburn, Montclair, Westfield, Red Bank, Livingston, and near to us, Maplewood.  All of these towns have special improvement districts.”