Most Clonmel councillors voice support for BID proposal with Cllr Dennehy lone dissenter

Five Clonmel councillors enthusiastically endorsed the Clonmel BID proposal at Tipperary County Council’s meeting on Monday citing the widespread support for the iniative among the town’s business community while the lone dissenting voice Cllr Niall Dennehy set out his strong objections.

The Clonmel Borough District councillors, who spoke in support of setting up of a Business Improvement District company, represented a range of political colours from Fianna Fáil Cllr Siobhan Ambrose and Fine Gael’s Cllr John Fitzgerald and Tom Acheson to Clonmel’s Mayor Cllr Pat English of the left wing Workers & Unemployment Action Group and Independent Richie Molloy.

After Meetings Administrator Ger Walsh updated the council on the commencement of the plebiscite, Cllr Ambrose was first out of the blocks to wish the BID proponents the best of luck with the ballot.

She said she had met the BID group and representatives of the Sligo BID company already up and running. She was very happy with the responses she received to her queries and welcomed the fact a Clonmel BID company will be able to access funding to implement intiatives for the town if ratepayers vote to set it up.

Cllr Acheson said it was the first time he had seen the town’s business people come together to take action. In welcoming the proposal, he said there had been “enough negativity about Clonmel”. He noted the BID company would only be in place for five years and if ratepayers don’t like it they can vote it out.

His FG party colleague Cllr Fitzgerald said as a Clonmel town centre ratepayer for 40 years, he considered it to be one of the best proposals to be put to the town’s business people.

“I think it’s a no brainer. I hope the ratepayers of Clonmel will support this and have every expectation that they will to get this new energy going in the town.”

Cllr English said he was very impressed by the initiative which seemed to be a “big plus” for the towns where BID companies already operate. He and a number of other councillors met with the BID proponents, all rate payers, who were all “excited and very enthusiastic” about getting the centre of town up and running.

Cllr Molloy echoed this view. “What convinced me is that every business person I talk to is willing to give it a go. I really feel something has to be done for the town centre,” he said after noting he constantly meets constituents “giving out” about Clonmel town centre.

Independent Clonmel Cllr Niall Dennehy claimed the BID initiative would involve “the extraction” of €2.5m from Clonmel ratepayers if it went ahead.

He contended Tipperary County Council and other bodies such as the Chamber of Commerce were already paid to do the job BID would be set up to do. A county council project manager was successfully doing what BID will be set up to do in Nenagh and last August a project manager was appointed by the Council to Clonmel where the same should apply.

He claimed the BID proponents and Tipperary County Council engaged selectively with a cohort of rat payers who will only have a BID levy of circa €200, written off by their not having to pay for Christmas lights.

He contended the real targets were the major businesses who will have to pay thousands of euros extra but still nly have a single vote in the plebiscite.

Cllr Dennehy claimed the BID proposal was an attempt to privatise what was left of the former Clonmel Corporation and Clonmel Borough Council and warned other municipal districts to “beware” as it would be coming their way.

Cllr Dennehy also claimed the qualified minority of 14 councillors required to carry a BID proposal was “totally undemocratic” and “absolutely unconstitutional”. He noted that 14 councillors voted against the most recent increase in rates but didn’t win the day as democracy prevailed.

He raised an objection concerning the identification of the BID proponents in a public advertisement and warned the plebscite’s wording couldn't be scripted by the BID proponents or council.

He complained he hadn’t seen the ballot paper wording and requested he be allowed view the wording before it went out.

He also objected on the grounds of data protection and GDPR to dissemination of ratepayers information for the purposes of deciding their BID levy.

Cllr Dennehy also informed the meeting he instructed the Council that no Clonmel BID plebiscite should be conducted in his name as an elected member of the local authority.

Ger Walsh responded that Clonmel Borough District placed an advert about the BID process in the latter half of 2025 and the process had to be recommenced because identification of the BID proponents was incorrect. He stressed the resubmitted proposal was valid and correct. He was satisfied all the correct procedures were followed and satisfied to proceed with the ballot.

Clonmel Borough District Director of Services Jonathan Cooney explained the legislation governing BIDs was very clear - the work of a BID company can’t replace the work of a local authority.

He said the council project manager for Clonmel was working on a URDF application for the town and other capital projects that were “completely independent” of the work of a BID.

He also clarified that the wording of the plebiscite ballot paper was prescribed by legislation and the council has no choice in terms of what wording was on it.

Mr Walsh said the ballot simply asked rateapayers were they in favour yes or no to the BID proposal.

After Mr Walsh gave more information in response to Cllr Dennehy concerning the the ballot papers and balloting process, Cllr Dennehy attempted to interject with more queries.

CEO Sinead Carr stepped in and acknowledged that while Cllr Dennehy had strong views the council didn’t write the constitution or legislation. If he had an issue it was the national government he should go to.

She stressed the council wasn't making a decision on any BID proposal at this meeting.

She pointed out that if the majority of rate payers were not happy to go ahead with the initiative they will have an opportunity to say this now.

She believed there had been a reasonable discussion on the issue and there was no reason to drag it on for hours. They would come back to it in June and in the meantime they should get on with the ballot.