ABSTRACT
Entrepreneurship is as much a public process as it is a private attribute and its role in PPPs works to transform private sector ambitions into public accountabilities (National Commission on Entrepreneurship, 2001). In general, public nature appears to tell us a great deal about the role of entrepreneurship because it is strongly correlated with social capital. A PPP, especially the BID model, is highly entrepreneurial but with a public twist that is synergistic with social capital and the networks that produce it. BIDs are units of sub-government based on special assessment forms of public financing that create a formal PPP and a local self-help mechanism to address revitalization and redevelopment needs of a designated business area (Mitchell, 1999; Hoyt, 2001; Stokes, 2002; Justice, 2003; Morçöl, 2006). “BIDs have been given the financial and managerial capacity to make a difference” (Mitchell, 2008, p. 38). “Business Improvement Districts are self-assessment districts that are initiated and governed by property or business owners and authorized by governments to operate in designated urban and suburban geographic areas” (Morçöl, Hoyt, Meek, and Zimmerman, 2008, p. xv). The BID manager is strongly identified as a public management entrepreneur, representing a pragmatic form of public administration that is well suited to hybrid management techniques necessary for PPPs to succeed. “BID organizations act as an ‘entrepreneurial holding company’ … a means of governing the center of communities through a partnership involving public, private and civic actors” (Segal, 1998, p. 1). However, entrepreneurial activity, as progressive as it may be, does not come without concerns regarding public accountability, gentrification, conflicts with residential advocates, service provision, and policy influences (Hoyt, 2001; Stokes, 2002; Justice, 2003). There was virtually no evidence that BIDs were exceptional in these ways. “The caricatures of BIDs – that they are too consumption-oriented, undemocratic, and unaccountable – are likewise criticisms of city administration in many policy areas” (Mitchell, 2008, p. 14). BIDs may get involved in local political controversies but seem to act as vehicles for accelerated citizen involvement and dialogue. Unlike purely economic agencies, BIDs are so localized that they become extensions of the community and their true nature is community development. Their positive impact on quality of life issues that affect everyone in the community may be the reason for their popularity and persistence.
