What is it about Boston we wonder?

All around us, Lincolnshire’s other district councils seem to be in good heart – delivering services to their taxpayers and not forever moaning about how hard up and run down they are, whilst espousing the formations of “partnerships” which are really nothing of the kind ... simply a thinly disguised way of getting others to do the work for them, and often foot the bill to boot.

***

This week saw the meeting of the Boston Town Area committee – B-Tacky to its friends ... who number few, if any.

High on the agenda – as regular readers will already know – was a begging request for funds to bale out the cost of this year’s Christmas lights switching-on ceremony and a so-called market.

Switch on some lights?

Put up a few stalls?

A snip at £15,000.

Astoundingly, the luvvies at Transported are stumping up the lion’s share, leaving B-Tacky to make up any shortfall.

The seeds were also sown for B-Tacky to think about how it might pay up in future years as well – as the current Christmas lighting contract expires this year and the council doesn’t have the money to pay for it any more.

As expected, the committee bent the knee, and agreed to pay up £2,500 – the thin end of what may prove to be a very expensive wedge.

Yet for the Munchkins at Worst Street this is just another exercise in financial cannibalism.

Only a couple of issues ago we reported on the – otherwise unreported  – syphoning of more than £300,000 from the reserves to the PRSA – which this week has allegedly  been “saved” yet again by another so-called “partnership” deal which sees a private company take control, but Worst Street continuing to foot the repair bills.

***

Why are we so exercised about the looting of B-Tacky, we hear you cry?

Because – put simply – paying for the borough's Christmas lighting is not on the committee’s to-do list.

Read this if you don’t believe us.

Or this ...

B-Tacky claws in more than £100,000 a year from the nine town centre wards that it purportedly represents.

The 18 parishes outside the central areas make charges of around £200,000 to cover spending in their respective patches.

B-Tacky is expected to have a £60,000 surplus at the end of March next year, largely because it rarely spends any money on the wards within its care.

And that is why the cabinet thinks that the committee's funds are fair game and is prepared to ignore its own rules and regulations and nick the money for a borough-wide project that will also draw in visitors from outside the area.

***

The two chief beggars to B-Tacky were the portfolio holders for the Town Centre and Leisure – Councillors Paul Skinner and Claire Rylott.

As they are new to the cabinet, their assault on another committee’s funds might be due to naivety.

But another cabinet member – Councillor Michael Brookes – is not a newcomer. He is in his second term as a cabinet member and is also the council’s deputy leader.

Despite this, he has apparently set out to muddy the waters to help his henchpeople get their paws on BTAC’s cash.

Last week’s edition of the council’s Goody Two Shoes News (circulation 783 – see later in the blog) tells us: “Councillor Michael Brookes said Kirton and Swineshead provided their own lights.

“Cabinet members agreed that as BTAC (Boston Town Area Committee) mirrors the responsibilities of a parish or town council for Boston it should be approached about helping fund future Christmas lights.”

The cabinet is being wilfully ignorant over this issue.

If lights are to be provided for the borough as a hole – and also for the visitors that it is hoped to attract – then the cost must come from central funds as the rules stand at present.

B-Tacky could have refused politely, with a motion to the effect that the request from the cabinet was outside its remit, and politely referring the appeal back to the beggars to place before the full council.

Now, we suspect that the B-Tacky budget will forever be prey to demands for money to spend on non-central ward items for whatever wasteful whim seizes the cabinet “minds.”

***

Several other interesting items emerged at this week’s meeting. More on them in our next blog.

***

Earlier, we mentioned naivety in the same sentence as the portfolio holder for the town centre, Councillor Paul Skinner – and he certainly seems to be working hard to show it.

In a letter to the Boston Sub-Standard, he takes the paper’s columnist Observer to task over the debate on the Market Place and the replacement of planters with fake cast iron lookalike bollards.

He tells him “I will refresh his memory ...”   and whilst accusing the writer of missing key issues, in turn demonstrates not exactly the greatest knowledge on a subject that is supposed to be his cabinet specialism.

Councillor Skinner also has the impudence to ask Observer “What are you doing to help promote the use of this community space?”

We have to assume that this means that Councillor Skinner is after an idea or two to help him perform his duties – as any initiatives from him thus far have been conspicuous by their absence.

Let us refresh your memory, Mr Skinner.

Your council promised that once the Market Place work was completed it would become home to regular events and attractions and a variety of alternative markets.

Councillor Skinner cites the only new market to have emerged since then – the craft market.

Two weeks ago this comprised just three stalls, and we would be surprised if the stallholders consider it worth their while attending for much longer.

Does the council promote it?

No it doesn’t – so no one knows it's there, so no-one bothers to visit it.

But perhaps that's someone else’s job as well, eh, Councillor Skinner?

You say that the Market Place is not needed as a “massive” car park, as there are almost 3,000 parking spaces in the town centre.

Perhaps a sign or two indicating where they might be found, and how far away they are would assist people to park elsewhere – but no such signs are in evidence.

What does worry us is his statement that: “I don't think enough has yet been done on consultation to produce the best solution on parking and loading" – which has the awful sound of yet another Task and Finish Group about it.

***

Talking of which...

A regular reader and occasional contributor who is In the Know asks: “Could I put my 'pennyworth' in on the Task and Finish issues

“1: Various issues regarding communication with its members formed the main T and F findings on Boston Business Improvement District.

“Although the Cabinet and officers were aware that there was no sign of improvement in such matters they – the administration –  were apparently quite happy with this state of affairs, as evidenced by the 17 Boston Borough Council  referendum votes being cast in favour of the continuation of BID in spite of its faults.

“2: At the end of the presentation of the Social Change Task and Finish report to the Scrutiny Committee, a final recommendation was added; that enough funding should be put in the council's relevant budget heading to implement such recommendations as were the council’s responsibility.

“This was, as I recollect, agreed by the Scrutiny Committee but did not appear in the final report agreed by the Cabinet for some reason.

“Isn't Cabinet government wonderful!?

“3:  Since you started listing the readership of GTSN at 784 I have cancelled my subscription. Please adjust your figure accordingly.”

***

Looking back, there were no prizes for guessing why the council threw its votes in favour of Boston BID continuing.

BID imposed a levy on its involuntary members – backed up by legal action from the council if they did not pay – which raised £100,000 a year.

Despite the fact that the BID rules barred it from carrying out jobs that were the responsibility of the local council, Worst Street was soon mining this rich vein of income as a supplement to their own coffers.

Sounds familiar?

See above.

***

Still with Tasking and Finishing ... another reader wrote to say: “I get the impression that yet more money is to be spent on 'reports' etc., filling non-jobs at very high cost and having yet another massive talk-in which produces nothing!

“Seeing as all the services are being cut – the PRSA excepted of course – is the council actually spending anything on services ... apart from the fortnightly bin collections?

“If all these cuts continue we'll soon be paying only for salaries etc.

“I always thought if we 'cut' something we didn't spend money – so shouldn't we really be paying less in council tax.

“Or doesn't it work like that?”

The answer is a) this is Boston Borough Council so b) it doesn’t work.

***

A bleat after last week's blog from the company which owns the Assembly Rooms nightclub after our report which quoted Worst Street as saying that it provided Christmas lights on the building.

“Disappointed in criticism again regarding one of our venues,” it twittered." Never asked for Xmas lighting. Pay for the electric for the entire street’s Xmas lights. No praise for £2k of hanging baskets and similar cost to upkeep …"

As we noted in our reply, we made no criticism – we merely quoted a council report which claimed that it provided the lights, and remarked that we felt that the owners should take responsibility.

As far as the hanging baskets are concerned, they are an attraction that benefits the Assembly Rooms as much as anyone else, and a number of other premises use such items to enhance the look of their premises.

What the Activ tweet did do was to remind us that when the Assembly Rooms deal was still being discussed, a report to the council said; “The applicant considers that the for the majority of the time, the building will continue to be used for a wide variety of private and public social functions including community based activities such as clubs and meetings, blood donor sessions, coffee mornings and Weight Watchers.”

Has any of that happened? We don’t think so.

***

We mentioned Boston Business “Improvement” District last week and the not-so-small matter of the £6,600 that was paid over by Boston Borough Council to the Lincolnshire Chamber of Commerce acting on behalf of the new Boston Town Team, on 2nd March this year.

This is, of course, the same town team that claims not to have any direct funding.

Most probably, it doesn’t need any, as it appears to have done nothing much since its first meeting in January when it declared that its “vision” was “to make Boston a better place to work, live and play; increase footfall along with tourist numbers and reduce the number of empty units in the town centre, enhancing the vitality and viability of the town.”

It identified as its three key objectives to increase footfall by 10%, reduce empty shops by 20% and create an annual increase in the number of tourists visiting the town centre. 

We have lost count of the number of times aims such as these have been written down – and never come to anything.

But what has this to do with Boston BID – which everyone thought was voted out of existence in October 2013 and ceased operations at the end of that year?

Well, depending on your viewpoint, the good – or bad – news is that Boston BID appears to be alive and well.

According to companies house, Boston BID’s last annual accounts were made up to March 31st last year, and the last annual return was made up to February this year.

This return lists the 447 “shareholders” and nine company directors – including the names of two former councillors.

According to these accounts, the BID was owed more than £11,000 and has more than £4,000 cash in hand – giving it total assets of more than £15,000.

But within a year of those accounts more than £14,000 falls due to creditors which will leave a balance of slightly more than £800.

Boston BID’s next annual return is expected at Companies House by 19th March next year.

Between now and then, perhaps someone would like to tell us what is going on.

***

Earlier we commented how – whilst many of our fellow district councils are in good heart, and being positive – our own so-called leaders bury their heads in the sand and whine on endlessly about how hard up they are and how nothing can be done any more.

Tell that to South Kesteven District Council – which this week saw work begin on the £3.6 million first section of the Grantham Southern Relief Road.

After completion of phase one, a further two phases of the relief road will follow, with the entire road expected to be operational by 2019.

Local County Councillor Richard (Bob the Builder) Davies who is also Lincolnshire’s portfolio holder for transport, says that the southern relief road project will not only improve Grantham’s infrastructure, it will also provide an opportunity to aid the economic growth of the area and provide access to a proposed housing development and commercial development land nearby.

The project is being led by Lincolnshire County Council supported by South Kesteven District Council, the Greater Lincolnshire LEP, the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) and local businesses.

Now that is what we call a partnership – unlike the shonky deals that Worst Street cobbles together under the same name ... mostly with Transported for a load of unwanted and necessary artwork.

But of course, it’s free – which is why Worst Street always orders a double helping.

***

So they’re happy bunnies in Grantham – and things are going well in South Holland as well.

Earlier this year, work began on a 51-acre business park off the A16 in Spalding known as the Lincolnshire Gateway project.

It’s due to be completed by the end of the year and will include a 52-bedroom Premier Inn hotel, a Brewers Fayre pub/restaurant, petrol filling station, shops and a conference centre.

It’s believed that up to 1,000 new jobs could be created over the next ten years.

Spalding already boasts a Travelodge Hotel at the Springfields shopping outlet, which is home to more than 50 big name stores.

And if that’s not enough, plans for improving transport connections to Spalding will be discussed at the first Lincolnshire Transport Conference to be staged next month  at Springfields Event Centre.

The conference will be about “Connecting South Lincolnshire” with guest speakers from Virgin Trains, East Midlands Trains, Brylaine and Freshlinc.

Government representatives will also talk about the challenges facing Spalding’s infrastructure and their plans to better connect the area.

The event is organised by the Spalding and Peterborough Transport Forum and the Spalding and District Chamber of Commerce.

But don't forget .,. Boston’s got a Town Team, and a Task and Finish group will be spending months debating what needs to be done for the borough.

When the poet John Milton wrote “They also serve who only stand and wait” he might have had Boston Borough Council in mind – apart from the “serve” bit, that is.

Instead of anything approaching action Worst Street has followed the lead set by David Cameron in the war on terror – by employing drone warfare.

How so?

It drones on and on and on about how hard up and powerless it is until we taxpayers surrender or drop dead from boredom!

***

A couple of weeks ago we mentioned the successful calendar produced for the first time by Boston Borough Council, and lamented the fact that no one appeared to have deemed the idea worth doing again.

It must have sounded a wake-up call in someone’s mind at Worst Street as – lo and behold – letters went out dated 7^th September to last year’s sponsors asking them if they wanted to help again, by funding a page at a cost of £138.

Apparently the calendar will feature “Boston through the seasons” and given the lateness of the decision to produce it, must be relying on old, stock photos – rather than specially commissioned ones.

Apparently, Worst Street is not asking for cash down – on the grounds that “we might not get enough sponsors in time” ... which scarcely seems surprising at this stage.

About this time last year, it had been printed.

Oh, did we say that last year's sponsors were being invited to take a page again this year?

Well, not quite all of them.

Last year, Boston Eye was pleased to take a page after a last minute appeal went out for help, and Boston Borough Council was happy to take our money.

This year, however, no letter has been received at Number 1 Eye Street.

We must remember to send a bowl of sour grapes to the “communications” department!

***

Of course, a similar example of bad timing has occurred with the Christmas lights/Christmas market debacle – with the cabinet beggars telling B-Tacky that if it slips them some money it can nominate a committee member to attend and contribute to the event planning meetings leading up to the 26^th November.

Given that last year’s council committee on Christmas began meeting around Easter, we don't hold out much hope for whatever might emerge this late in the day with a window of just two months.

Mind you, everything is done as quickly as possible in Worst Street these days.

We’re told that the last cabinet meeting, whose agenda included the quarterly performance, finance and risk figures, policy for keeping people safe and the future of Christmas in Boston was done and dusted in slightly more than half an hour.

Clearly a group that takes things seriously ... and doesn’t just rubber stamp reports.

And how about this final example?

The Vintage A Fayre, which is “organised” by Boston Borough Council, but scarcely ever publicised is the subject of the Tweet on the left ...

Just twelve days before the event, Worst Street makes a “last call” for applicants for the last few stalls available.

Twelve days!

Despite the lack of pre-publicity, we stumbled across the most recent of these “fayres” which mostly sells old clothes, and all but constituted the “crowds.”

The latest Tweet invites anyone interested in hiring a stall to contact Boston Borough Council’s “events” department.

Better not to ... you don't want to wake them.

***

Forgive the photographer’s shadow – but you need the sun at your back for this particular snap.

As we strolled through town the other day we noticed this trail of oil droplets, running the length of Strait Bargate and clearly pointing to Brylaine Buses as the culprit.

Knowing the Worst Street fondness for gadgetry, how about buying another cleaning machine to join the fag vac and gum remover to wash away this new piece of unsightliness.

And perhaps have a word with Mr Brylaine as well – suggesting that they check their sump nuts for tightness.

***

In common with just about everyone with a nominal title, Boston’s Mayor, Councillor Richard Austin, sent a letter of congratulation to the Queen as she became Britain’s longest-reigning monarch.

He began well enough – writing “On behalf of the people of the Borough of Boston ... “but soon after developed a spot of I-trouble, lapsing from the collective to the personal.

“I could not allow the moment to pass without recognising your great contribution to this country and the Commonwealth. It is a magnificent milestone in British history.

“I would like to express my very best wishes to you, Your Majesty, and the Royal Family.”

We’re sure that there wasn’t a dry I in Buck House when the letter arrived – hopefully by second class post, given the state of the borough's finances.

It struck us as notably patronising, which was really surprising, considering who the author was.

Doubtless the GTSN will soon be splashing the headlines when a royal flunky responds with a stock reply that will be sent to everyone who has sent the Queen a goodwill message.

***

And talking of the GTSN, we reported last week on its claim in a £300 newspaper advert begging for readers,  to be a “warts and all publication” – an expression apparently liked so much that it was used more than once, and which we took to mean that it reported the rough with the smooth.

Tuesday’s edition of GTSN reported the findings of the annual “Customer Survey.”

GTSN crooned: “The annual customer survey revealed that 69% of respondents were happy with where they live, 46% were satisfied with how the council runs things with 30% dissatisfied. Highest levels of satisfaction were for garden waste collections (82%), refuse and recycling (80%), Boston Market 65%) and Boston in Bloom (64 %.)

Missing from the story was the part of the report which said: “The highest levels of dissatisfaction were for Public Toilets (76%), Car Parking (57%) and the Town Centre (41%.)

A wart or two appears to be missing, wethinks – which says far more than we ever could about the claim to report the bad as well as the good.

If nothing else, someone ought to tell the portfolio holder for the Town Centre about all the disappointment he presides over so he can find someone to appeal to for advice!

***

Finally, we can feel the gleeful hysteria building after the news that Boston in Bloom has won a gold award in the East Midlands in Bloom competition.

Given that the cost of staging this dog hanging is put at £19,000, we just hope that the medal is made of the real stuff.

Then we could flog it and do something for Boston for Christmas.

***

Boston Eye is taking next week off. Join us again on Friday 2^nd  October

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Our former blog is archived at: http://bostoneyelincolnshire.blogspot.com  

When the powers that be who claim to lead Boston Borough Council are scraping the bottom of the barrel, their knee jerk response is to create what is known as a Task and Finish Committee.

As the name implies, councillors set themselves a task – but then for some reason never seem to finish it.

In recent years we have seen two such comedy acts performed on the Worst Street playbill.

One was supposed to be recommending major improvements to the way that the former Boston Business “Improvement” District was run and – although the recommendations were vital and often tough – a total absence of any follow-up meant that the BID continued to get away with its glittering incompetence without any further action or comments being made.

Then there was the report on the Social Impact of Population Change, which won praise in some quarters – but again was subsequently criticised because of the absence of any sort of follow-up.

Both of these committees took up a lot of time – the population change group met regularly for seven months. And presumably a lot of cost was incurred as well, because large numbers of “witnesses” were called to give “evidence” to guide it towards its conclusions.

***

Now, we’re probably going to do it all over again – this time with a Task and Finish Group “to carry out a review of Boston and its offer”

The idea popped up on the agenda of the borough’s Environment and Performance Committee – and in full aims “to review and consider the functioning and promotion of Boston and its ability in providing and presenting an offer for residents, visitors, tourists and investors that is welcoming and encouraging and so ensures the long term health, wellbeing and enhancement of the town.

“To seek to understand the opportunities available to the council to improve the town as a way of increasing footfall, commercial activity and to boost the visitor economy and identity of Boston.”

A starter-for-ten list of questions has been drawn up ... and we can assist at this early stage with some answers.

Q: How are we seeking to support and develop the visitor economy?

A: You are not.

Q: Is the way in which car parking is provided and charged for appropriate?

A: No.

Q: What is the extent of comparator information we have or can obtain for other towns?

A: There is a lot of information available out there. You have accessed it up on numerous previous occasions and apparently learned nothing from it.

Q: Is the way in which we provide Tourist Information Services appropriate and working?

A: No.

Q: Is signposting of the town centre for residents, business and visitors sufficient and appropriate?

A: No.

Q: Does the town make the most of markets and events opportunities and maximise the use of spaces? Can more be done?

A: No and Yes.

Q: How well do we advertise and promote Boston?

A: Very badly.

***

We are astonished that these questions are being asked yet again, as they have arisen so many times in the past.

On those occasions nothing was done – although a lot of time was spent around committee room tables waffling on and on.

We note that organisations and individuals mentioned as likely candidates to be called to  give evidence are:  the Chamber of Commerce, the Boston Town Team, the Boston Area Partnership and the Boston Visitor Economy Partnership, along with the Borough Council’s  Town Centre Services Manager, Arts, Heritage and Tourism Manager and Events Officer.

These last three posts are something of a mystery to us – and we are hard-pressed to recall any reports of their activities.

So what of the Chamber of Commerce?

According to the website of the Lincoln-based Lincolnshire Chamber of Commerce, “The Boston Area Chamber is the independent voice and representative body for the business community within Boston and surrounding areas and provides a range of high quality services in response to the needs of the members and the wider business community.

“The Boston Area Chamber, with support from the Lincolnshire Chamber of Commerce, also proactively arranges networking events which encourage inter-trading amongst members and the wider business community.

“The Boston Area Chamber also has close working relationships with Boston Borough Council’s Economic Development Team, and by working together it aims to increase the economic viability of the area.”

It lists so much – yet we have heard so little of what it has done. Perhaps that is because it has done so little.

And what exactly do Boston Borough Council’s Economic Development Team do to earn their crust?

So what of the Boston Town Team?

This is an offshoot of the Boston Area Chamber of Commerce, and it met for the first – and as far as we can tell, the only time – in January.

Ahead of the meeting, we were told that the team would only be as successful as the local business people supporting it.

Afterwards, we were told that despite a low turnout, the meeting put a stake in the ground to start a dialogue with businesses about what they want to see in their Town Team business plan.

Scarcely a dozen businesses turned up for the meeting – when Boston Business Improvement District existed, its town centre domain comprised around 600 forced levy payers.

The first and only Town Team newsletter appeared in April when it was promised that one would be circulated “every four to six weeks.”

So what of the Boston Area Partnership?

Its most recent mention was two years ago, when Boston Borough Council bleated: “delivering our ambitious goals is going to be a major challenge in the current economic climate. We believe that partnership working is the key to making this happen.”

“One of the key mechanisms which we use to support partnership working is Boston Area Partnership (BAP) which includes key partners such as Boston College and Boston Mayflower, our main social housing provider. The partnership is administered by the borough council and meets quarterly to share information, coordinate activity and to identify gaps where partnership working could 'add value'.

“BAP is underpinned by other key local partnerships, particularly the Boston Strategic Health Group and the East Lincolnshire Community Safety Partnership.

“Recent partnership projects include the £2.5 (sic) Boston Market Place, Grow2Eat, Haven Barrier and Boston in Bloom.”

Perhaps the word historic should replace recent after all this time.

Although there should by now have been  around ten meetings of this partnership, there is no trace of any meetings, agendas or minutes, and the last positive document in the name of BAP was a “Community Strategy” document covering the period 2004-2009.

So what of the Boston Visitor Economy Partnership?

It’s back to the Lincoln-centred Chamber of Commerce for news of this one, which is described thus  “ … a mix of public and private sector organisations with a common vision – to grow Boston's visitor economy. One of the finest market towns in Lincolnshire, with history and heritage of national and international significance, development and management of the visitor offer has been recognised as an area that can support real growth.

“BVEP meets around four times a year. The key driver for activity delivered by BVEP is the Boston Area Destination Management Plan (DMP). The DMP sets out the context of the area's visitor economy and identifies actions to support development.

“Key projects BVEP are currently supporting include: The development of a sustainable business membership base to generate resource to deliver activity for the benefit of the area, creation and distribution of an annual visitor guide, an enhanced pedestrian way finding and historical interpretation signage scheme for Boston.”

Pretty well all of these organisations are tied to the Lincolnshire Chamber of Commerce – one of whose employees is directly responsible for at least two of them.

Any “evidence” from these organisations to the Task and Finish Group will certainly be interesting to hear – as we feel certain that some of them no longer exist.

***

There is also an issue of money. According to the Town Team, it “does not have any direct funding; however there is over £6,000 of funding available to the team through the Porta’s (sic) Scheme.”

This was a runner’s up award to Boston BID –  along with all the other groups which entered –  totalling £10,000 for its dismal attempt to win one of ten £100,000 jackpots to really improve Boston for the better.

Market Rasen won a share of the big money, incidentally.

So what happened to the money when Boston BID was voted to death by the disillusioned businesses that it had so demonstrably failed to help?

The money was initially held by Boston Borough Council, which paid £3,400 into the BID account on the 27^th August 2013 for a town centre project snappily named Boston NFC Retail Voucher Hub Solution.

The remaining £6,600 was paid over to the Lincolnshire Chamber of Commerce acting on behalf of the new Boston Town Team, on 2^nd March 2015 – which makes its claim to have no direct funding an interesting one, to say the least ... although we are sure that the money is somewhere safe and sound in Lincoln.

***

So back to the proposed Task and Finish committee.

According to the big idea ... it will “assist in maximising on the potential of Boston and the identity of Boston, to ensure that the council and other partners, agencies and private sector facilitates the sustaining and where possible improving the town's vitality and to grow the visitor economy – with a view to achieving: increased footfall, increased spend, greater variety of events, more visitors, more inward investment, improved satisfaction, lower shop vacancy rate and a higher profile

Does anyone seriously believe that months of meetings of the great and the good will achieve anything?

So many of the things listed above have been promised before – we particularly recall the pledge to stage regular events and a variety of special markets in the newly “improved” Market Place.

Did they happen?

Did they hell!

Worst Street is good at talking the talk – but when it comes to walking the walk; it is as lame as Long John Silver.

*** 

Worryingly, we have heard talk that the Munchkins like the idea of appointing what would doubtless be a highly paid Town Manager.

The problem here would be to find the right person for the job.

Too many mistakes have been made in Boston in the past, and given the way the civic mind-set works here we are very concerned at any possible outcome. 

***

The Norprint disaster is gradually unravelling as the receivers go about their duties.

The most recent report at the end of last month contained a list of around 150 creditors.

It’s estimated that unsecured creditors are owed more than £5 million, whilst preferential creditors –  such as former staff owed unpaid wages and holiday arrears –  are owed around £105,000,

When the administrators were called in the company’s book debts were £2,750,000, of which about £1,600,000 is likely to be recovered.

Around Lincolnshire, dozens of local business are owed money – ironically including Norprint’s parent company Magnadata’s Norfolk Street operation, which is due £60,000.

A number of other Boston companies are also owed what for them are most likely big sums – £10,000 for just two local businesses alone.

And Boston Borough Council – which means us taxpayers – is owed more than £13,500 ... presumably in business rates.

But whilst you may think that a situation like this produces nothing but losers, there are winners in the form of the people tasked with sorting out the mess.

How about these rates for administering the problem?

 

***

Despite promises that this would not happen, Boston Borough Council has been out with the begging bowl again to tap up the Boston Big Local kitty – this time for a £1,200 machine to vacuum up discarded cigarette ends. 

A shameless Councillor Michael Brookes, portfolio holder for waste services, said: “We are grateful to Big Boston Local for funding the new street vac, which has already had a big impact on cigarette litter and other small items of street litter which can be very difficult and time consuming to remove.”

The evidence of our own eyes contradicts the view that the new machine has already has a big impact on the dog ends but let us hope that it has the time to before it is consigned to the  motorised graveyard where all such Worst Street purchases end up.

Back in the days when the council paid for its own equipment, the Boston Town Area Committee – B-Tacky – blew £1,000 on a litter vacuum for the Main Ridge East Placecheck group, which pledged to use the machine as part of annual Boston in Bloom activities, clean all 23 streets in the Placecheck area at least once a year and make it available to other groups wishing to put it to good use in the town.

Needless to say, after the initial roll-out for the newspaper pictures, neither hide nor hair of the machine was seen again.

And as long ago as 2008 our environmentally friendly councillors spent £7,000 on a machine to remove chewing gum from the town’s streets.

It was trooped out once for the paparazzi, and seen once more about a year later, and the last we heard is was languishing at the former Fen Road depot, where we expect it shortly to be joined by the planters from the Market Place when it proves too much effort to locate them around the town and maintain them.

As with the proposed task and finish group mentioned earlier, it’s the case that the council talks a lot but never turns words into actions.

***

More beggars are to be out in force next week in the shape of Councillors Paul Skinner and Claire Rylott – portfolio holders for the town centre and leisure services respectively.

They’re asking Wednesday’s meeting of  B-Tacky for money to defray what is estimated as the £15,000 cost of funding a separate Christmas Market on Sunday 29^th November to follow the switching-on of the lights the previous Thursday.

Insolently, Worst Street has already tapped up that band of luvvies known as Transported for the bulk of the cost,  leaving “the borough” – i.e. B-Tacky, the committee which can’t even elect a chairman – to pitch in the difference.

As members of the cabinet, neither Messrs Skinner nor Rylott should need reminding that it is not the role of the committee to fund events other than those which benefit the specific nine town centre wards which its members represent.

Any funding which benefits the borough as a hole – which this certainly does – must be paid for from the main council budget.

We hope that given their newness to the cabinet, Councillors Skinner and Rylott are perhaps naïve enough not to know this – though we have to say that the pair of them have disappointed us greatly since their elevation to the Worst Street peerage.

And perhaps Councillor Rylott could tell us how her cabinet remit of leisure extends to switching on Christmas lights and staging a market.

We also note that the report lists the Assembly Rooms among the places that it lights during the Christmas period.

Perhaps instead of forever whining on about how little money is has for the nicer things in life it might pull the plug on these and let the owner foot the bill instead, as it is a private nightclub.

Don’t you think it is strange that this council can conjure up a spare £250,000 at the snap of the fingers after cocking up the estimates for  its infamous biomass rescue plan for the PRSA  but that money for anything else is never available?

*** 

It seems that it’s no longer a case of “get your trousers on, you’re nicked” but more one of “excuse me sir, would you kindly robe yourself below the waist so that we can escort you to our Black Maria without frightening the horses.”

Boston Police have switched into namby-pamby mode in recent days with their messages to the public at large on their Twitter account.

We’ve read some saccharine drivel in our time, but this new attempt to cosy up to the punters plumbs new depths.

We also wondered – perhaps uncharitably – whether there was an ulterior motive behind all this when we read this final tweet...

***

Another big idea being pushed forward – along with the begging bowl once again –  by Worst Street takes the form of a “special” scale map of Boston in Boston Stump for people to mark their memories of the town on.

The borough burbles ... “This is part of the Heritage Lottery funded Explore and Discover Boston project which is a partnership initiative with Boston Borough Council, Lincolnshire County Council and Heritage Lincolnshire. The project hopes to find out what places are special to people in Boston and to learn more stories about Boston’s past.

“All the information uncovered will be used alongside new signage which is currently being created to map out the town’s heritage sites.”

Signposting is, of course, already in the Task and Finish group agenda mentioned earlier.

Still – doing the same thing twice keeps everyone nice and busy, doesn’t it?

***

We’ve mentioned begging bowls a couple of times now, and one of the saddest examples of the week came in the form of a paid-for advertisement in one of our local “newspapers” pleading with people to sign up for Worst Street’s Goody Two Shoes News – the daily so-called council “bulletin” (circulation, 784 in a borough where the population is more than 60,000.)

It’s described as a “warts and all” publication – which we presume means that it claims to report the bad news along with the good although –  to use the word for the second time in a week –  the flavour is almost always saccharine.

It uses the excuse of working with partner organisations to mask the fact that good solid news about the council and what it  is –  or rather is not doing –  is scant, and that the bulletin is often filled with news from the partners rather than the principal.

The claim is that is costs nothing to produce ... “zilch, gratis, nada ...” (pass the sick bag) – except for the salaries of the two person communications department and is merely a spin off from their unspecified normal duties –   (whatever they are.)

Questions have been asked about this publication and its relevance both inside and outside Worst Street, and the advertisement – which cost around £300 – is surely a pathetic last ditch attempt to give it some sort of credibility and buy readers.

If Boston Borough Council is serious about informing the public about what it does, it can surely come up with something better than this – a publication that even some council members have told us doesn’t count because it is such a load of tosh that scarcely anyone reads it.

The advert did, however, strike a mischievous chord with us.

Repeated use of the expression “warts and all” reminded us that warts are associated with witches, and that one of the most famous witches of the all is the Wicked Witch of the West  ...  Street.

Small world, isn't it?

One thing that we can agree on, though, is that at a cost of zilch, gratis, nada the publication is an overpriced insult to its audience

***

Will Boston Marina soon be renamed the Waterside Housing Estate?

After our mention last week about a plan to convert the Witham Tavern Pub into “apartments” comes another application – to demolish the existing chandlery and build one detached house and a terraced block of four houses.

Now, if only there was a way to concrete over that damn river, things would be perfect.

***

Finally, another anecdote which shows how concerned our councillors are about the people that they purportedly represent.

A recent parish council meeting heard a complaint from a resident that wheelie bins were going unemptied, and promised to raise the matter at Worst Street.

The problem continued so the person involved rang directly to complain.

By way of response, a black bin bag and a blue plastic bin bag arrived through the post.

Did the councillors at the meeting offer to raise the issue on their ratepayer’s behalf?

Don’t be silly.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com  Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

Our former blog is archived at: http://bostoneyelincolnshire.blogspot.com  

According to the adage, the devil is in the detail – and in the case of Boston Borough Council it took a devil of a lot of searching to find the details which showed that the council has again cocked up it on the spending front.

Regular readers will recall that Boston Borough Council’s habit of grasping at whatever fashionable straw is currently in the wind recently saw approval granted to acquire biomass boilers at the Princess Royal Sports Arena and the Moulder Leisure Centre.

The borough’s cunning plan was to spend £456,000 on the combined energy efficiency measures at the PRSA and the Moulder – which by some peculiar synthesis would then generate income and savings to pay for £840,000 worth of repairs and improvements at the PRSA– which would make it sexy enough to lure an outside operator to take on a lease for the place “so that the PRSA has a long-term future without on-going revenue support from the council.”

The rush for this was on – because of fears that subsidies for this form of heating wouldn’t last for ever ... which is proving to be the case.

Worst Street called in the experts –  in this case a company  called re:heat –  which has a vested interest in this sort of thing in that it not only specifies and installs the systems, but produces the woodfuel (sic) that powers them.

And according to the agenda at the time ... “the council has been supported by Reheat who has reviewed the costs and benefits associated with installing woodchip-fired boilers at both PRSA and GMLC.

“They have also reviewed heat loads, provided advice on boiler sizing and prepared detailed drawings and schematics for both sites.”

You can’t go wrong with the experts, can you?

***

But apparently you can.

After approving this ambitious project the Worst Street Munchkins ran into a slight snag – which quite literally appeared as a footnote among the reams of information put before the Corporate and Community Committee at the end of last month.

Whoops-a-daisy ... did we say that we only wanted £456,000 for the PRSA and GMLC Energy Efficiency Projects?

Silly old us.

We may have said that and turned to our partners at re:heat for advice. but the fact is that an “increase in estimates following two tendering exercises,” and “revisions” to initial plans including additional pipework connections at GMLC, plus higher costs than projected following increases to the quality specified to ensure optimum performance and increased returns on investment, call for a larger capacity biomass boiler at PRSA “to facilitate future initiatives.” and essential replacement of pumps at GMLC.”

Not to worry, though – it will all be funded from reserves.

To try to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, Worst Street has upped the estimate of the so-called “profits” from the scheme – the cost of which has now surged by 64%, from £456,000 to £749,000.

So – having approved one targeted spend we then realise not only that it is wrong, but we throw in some extra costs as well.

The Moulder also swallowed up £195,000 from reserves four years ago, in a tacky deal with third party groups who are supposed to pay back £150,000 over five years – which we presume is happening ... although it has not been mentioned since.

That was way back in 2011, following which spending on the Moulder carried on ... and on ... and on ... until it reached around £1/4  million at the point where we stopped counting – and that excluded the cost of the solar panels that were installed.

But it’s not all bad news...

Apparently spending even more on these projects increases dramatically the “profits” to be made over twenty years– from £1,700,000 in the case of the PRSA to £2 million and at Money Box Moulder from £880,000 to £1,100,000.

But just in case, there is a get-out clause which says that these returns are “assuming average LPG, and mains gas, costs return towards normal historical figures over 20 year period,”

So, as long as energy costs fall steadily over two decades (yeah, right) all will be well.

We have to stop writing now ... we hear the sound of pigs in flight...

***

Ought it not to be the case that having got the calculations so badly awry as to constitute another huge raid on the dwindling reserves, the whole silly idea should be sent back to the drawing board.

The scheme has foundered before it set sail – yet the response is merely to paper over the cracks ... this time using £50 notes instead of something floral from Sanderson.

There are so many imponderables that it should be re-assessed, the costs and benefits properly calculated, and if it proves too expensive or pointless, then it should be kicked out of touch –  before it becomes yet another Worst Street own goal.

The biomass plan was cobbled together in January – when it was described as a “no-brainer” because it would be so obviously successful.

This was ahead of the May elections and the idea was fast tracked reportedly because of the urgency to cash in on subsidies and payments before the government began any possible reviews.

Well, a “no brainer” is has certainly proved to be.

***

Whilst our “leaders” have apparently bottomless pockets as far as spending on sport is concerned, their generosity does not appear to embrace the festive season.

It fact we may well see passing of the buck rather than of the turkey in future years following  a report to the borough’s Environment and “Performance” Committee earlier in the week.

It points out that the five-year contract for a mind-boggling £35,000 a year for seasonal lights expires at the end of the year.

In total keeping with the mind-set of a council that apparently has no eye to the future, the report declared “as matters currently stand the council has no current plan or budgetary provision in place to renew that contract or to seek new arrangements for the provision of Christmas lighting in the town for Christmas 2016 and into the future” and adds that “the provision of Christmas lighting in the town is a discretionary rather than statutory function of the council.

“In towns and cities across the country, Christmas lighting, if it provided, is paid for and supplied by various means and increasingly through private sector or charitable sponsorship or by town councils and parish councils.”

But not in Lincolnshire, it appears where most market town councils consider that supporting Christmas is a good idea.

Although the thrust of the report was one of discussion, repeated mentions of the cost and absence of any statutory responsibility strongly imply that Worst Street would rather be rid of the whole thing

Questions are asked such as “should the Borough Council, at a time of increasing budgetary constraint and pressure, continue to fund and support the provision of festive Christmas lighting across the town centre?’

“If it decides to both fund and/or support delivery, ‘what level of support and involvement, through facilitation, should it be involved in?’

“In times of austerity and with online competition, centres such as Boston need to use every trick in the book to get people into town to support retailers, pubs, restaurants and other businesses. We really need new commercial sponsorship to support the cost of Christmas lights if the council is to continue to facilitate.”

Three options were tabled.

The council carries on ... it doesn’t ... or it “proceeds to explore a new lighting contract … on the basis that other town centre traders, businesses, partners, agencies, community groups contribute significantly and also possibly, through a service level agreement take over the operational management of the resultant contract.”

This final plan would cost the council no more than £5,000 a year.

It appears that the date to switch on this year’s lights coincides with Thanksgiving Day in the United States.

Arise, a new cunning plan...

“As part of the lead up to 2020 and the Mayflower 400 celebrations ... an initiative known as ‘Illuminate’, is being rolled out  ...  (with) the intention that on each Thanksgiving day leading up to 2020 an ‘Illuminate’ event involving candles/replica candles be held in the respective towns and cities.

“The fact that these thanksgiving days occur at the same time we normally begin our own Christmas lead in, presents opportunities.

“This year, following discussions with portfolio holders, we are working with ‘Transported’ and also with Pescod Square shopping centre management, to seek to host a small Illuminate event to coincide with the traditional lights switch on. If this proceeds and if successful it would be hoped that this could continue in future years, leading to 2020.”

So, if we get this right, we stop celebrating Christmas and instead celebrate American Thanksgiving Day with a couple of candles – and not necessarily real ones at that.

Brilliant.

Ideas from this meeting will be discussed by the borough’s Cabinet of Curiosities next Wednesday.

Book your seats early to avoid disappointment.

***

Confusingly, the report mentions that “private sponsorship assists with Christmas tree purchase.”

For at least ten years, the tree was donated by Finnforest, and as recently as last year was a gift from the Port of Boston – yet the phrase suggests that local goodoers are chipping in towards costs borne by Worst Street, when this has not been the case.

We also have some trouble getting some of the numbers in the report to add up – but perhaps that’s just us.

***

Unsurprisingly, options said to be under consideration have included tapping up the Boston Town Area Committee – B-Tacky –   and/or the Boston Big Local fund for support.

It should not need pointing out by now that B-Tacky’s funds come from a special charge on council taxpayers living in the town centre wards in the same way that parish councils make charges to fund their budget.

The constitution of B-Tacky is quite clear that  this income is for funding projects to benefit the specific wards covered by the committee –  and that any monies required for the benefit of the borough as a hole  (Ed: don’t you mean ‘whole?’ Reporter: ‘No’) must come from the council's general budget.

Similarly and as repeatedly promised, the Boston Big Local kitty is not there for Boston Borough Council to tap into – as it has already done and is continuing to do.

***

Worryingly, the mention of Boston Borough Council working in “partnership” with third parties is increasingly being suggested.

These have a chequered history – the kind referred to by the authors of “1066 and All That” as “A Very Bad Thing.”

Famously, Worst Street partnered with Boston BID to progress the £53,000 empty shop funding grant given to the council by the government in three phases.

Phase 1 was abandoned because of the Wrong Sort of Stickers to decorate the windows of empty shops.

Various inaccurate quotes and wrong assumptions led to the cost of the second phase – to create the former Community Rooms –  rising from £30,000 to £47,000 which saw the third phase abandoned because  there was barely any money left.

The whole fiasco was described as “a learning curve” – presumably because the money wasted was not specifically the council’s – although the taxpayers of Boston were still the people who footed the bill through income, rather than council, tax.

***

The more partnerships we have the greater are the chances of making a mistake – but with the bonus of being able to pass the buck more easily.

At present, when we think of Boston Borough Council in partnership, other notable collaborations spring easily to mind.

Think ... Burke and Hare ... Jekyll and Hyde ... Sodom and Gomorrah ... Rod Hull and Emu ... The Krays ... Bonnie and Clyde ... Laurel and Hardy ... the list is endless.

***

A reader recently heard that a meeting of the council’s leadership junta – aka the cabinet – was taking place, and tried to find out when and where it was, as there were no published details available.

It seems that the meeting had been confused with another, and what was actually taking place was a cabinet “briefing” from which the public are excluded – and at which the powers that be presumably stitch things up ahead of the real thing.

Which reminds us: when next week’s cabinet meeting comes along will the promised “Question Time” be on the agenda?

There were only five “promises” – if you can dignify them with such a description – on the Conservative manifesto at the May elections ... and this was bottom of the list.

The idea, it said, was “enabling members of the public to ask questions and hold councillors to account on the issues that matter most.”

Perhaps the promise is being fine-tuned and will emerge at a later date, as there is certainly nothing about it on the agenda.

***

We often weigh up what South Holland District Council does alongside the lacklustre performance of the Worst Street music hall – and inevitably find Boston lacking in almost every respect.

So we had no fears when we learned last week that Councillor Gary Porter, leader of SHDC, representative for Spalding St Mary's ward, and Chairman of the Local Government Association had been awarded a peerage in the Dissolution Honours.

We can only think of one set of circumstances when our own leader and the phrase “Good Lord” might appear in the same sentence –  usually when he says something daft!

***

Having said, it seems that Boston does things differently when it comes to the matter of honouring people.

Last week the Boston Goody Two Shoes News (circulation 784) informed its reader that there were “Unsung heroes down your street.”

These were people nominated by others following an appeal by Worst Street who are to be immortalised on the sides of the borough’s rubbish carts – thus becoming “sung” heroes in the process.

An example in the GTSN shows a group of faceless binmen going about their duties with the tantalising question “anyone recognise the neighbourhood?”

We hate to say this, but whilst collecting a wheelie bin from outside someone's house, pulling it to the back of a lorry where it is automatically emptied, then wheeling it (not quite) back to where the owner left it for little pay in all weathers is not the most pleasant of jobs – but it scarcely constitutes the use of the word “heroic.”

The dictionary defines the word as: “having the characteristics of a hero or heroine; admirably brave or determined” –  and offers synonyms such as “brave, courageous, valiant, valorous, intrepid, bold, daring, audacious, superhuman, Herculean, fearless, doughty, undaunted, dauntless, unafraid, plucky, indomitable, stout-hearted, lionhearted, mettlesome, venturesome, gallant, stalwart, chivalrous, noble".

Somehow, we doubt whether any of the other nominees can be thus defined.

Coming next:  “Nipper” Bedford is named as a National Treasure.

***

It looks as though there are changes afoot in Boston in the coming months – though not especially for the better.

The first comes in a planning application for the long empty 550 year-old Pescod Hall – dismantled and moved to its present site in the Pescod Shopping Centre almost 40 years ago by its owners, Oldrids.

It was last used as a sandwich bar – and the latest plans are for use as a tea room/café/bar ... opening between 8am and 11pm Monday to Saturday and 8am to 5pm on Sundays.

What a pointless and inappropriate use for such a fine building.

We have said before that a more fitting role  for such a well-placed  historic asset would be as a visitor/tourist/local craft venue to benefit from the passing trade in the shopping centre and enhance it in the process.

Sadly – and despite its long association with Boston –  Oldrids seems more keen on making money than helping the town.

With a bar on offer, and opening until 11pm six nights a week in an area that will otherwise be closed, we can see problems on the horizon.

And what a clever idea to open a cafe and tearoom next to Greggs – which has revamped its shops to make them more like a cafe/tearoom and less like a bakery.

***

More changes will be taking place along Boston’s riverside as well if plans are approved.

The Witham Tavern pub – by the Boston Marina – has proved difficult to sell as a going concern.

Now a proposal from the marina is to change its use from public house to six apartments.

We had hoped – especially with the marina now in the hands of new owners – that there might have been a chance that the pub could have been given a new lease of life.

It is one of the town’s only truly “riverside” pubs – in that it is level with the waterside – and we had thought that it would be seen as an attraction to users of the marina and developed with this in mind.

But no.

Once again the lure of profiting from Boston – rather than improving what it might offer – has proved overwhelming.

***

One of our Quadrant Development critics has been in touch with new concerns about the project and the “reserved” matters associated with it – which is everything except for the proposed new “community” stadium for Boston United, which was the clincher that got the application approved in the first place.

An application in July by Chestnut Homes was made for the first two phases of residential development with detailed plans for the first 148 new homes of the 500 that have been proposed.

Our contributor writes: “The reserved matters are still open for comments, and the council may call it in to look at it, perhaps on the 15^th September.

“Their planning meeting is scheduled for 12^th October.

“Last August when the outline was passed on this project, any reserved matters were to be determined by Mr Paul Edwards (Boston’s development control manager) and the Chairman alone – at that time Councillor Mary Wright.

“Since no doubt this arrangement will have been passed on to the new chairman, Councillor Alison Austin, I was wondering whether she should be allowed to be in that position, being a resident of Wyberton?

“She openly had nothing to do with it all, as she was Mayor then, but now is in a vulnerable position, I would have thought.

“If the Boston United stadium is never built due to lack of funding–   as seems may be the case – is it right that the housing should still carry on?

“The said 500 homes would not benefit from a Community Stadium together with all the facilities they were promised to make it an enabling application.

“Would other builders not be annoyed they were not given the same opportunity on this site?

“The town will be blighted by another roundabout on the A16 together with a pedestrian crossing, also to add to the misery of entering the town.”

***

A reader was struck by our comments last week about proposals that might see the emergency services merge their control rooms to form a single call centre based in Lincoln.

“I was interested to read your comment regarding the possibility of all services being run from Lincoln and the implications,” he said.

“While it appears our representatives are hoping that if this were to happen we might get a better service (who are they kidding?) I recall an incident only a couple of years ago regarding reporting a pothole.

“I rang the council and was told it was ‘nothing to do with them’ … it was a county matter … but they could put me through to the relevant department.  In my naivety I assumed it would be the county office at West Street – and a very pleasant young lady asked for the details.

“Where was it? – Robin Hoods Walk, I replied.

“Where’s that? – Boston.

“Do you know the postcode? – Not exactly, but it’s near the Central Park; short pause, then ‘I can’t seem to find that.’ Another pause, then ‘Is it near Tattershall Road?’

“By this time I realised she was looking at a map on a screen (and probably in Lincoln) so I asked her to trace back down Norfolk Street until she found Central Park. Success!

“Then: Where exactly is it in Robin Hoods Walk, do you know the nearest address? – “No, but it’s only a couple of yards from the junction with Norfolk Street.

“How far from the junction? – A matter of yards.

“How big is it? – Well, I haven’t managed to measure it as I didn’t have a ruler handy, but about a foot square.

“How deep is it? – Does that matter, it’s a dangerous pothole.

“Well, if it’s less than a couple of inches deep it’s not deep enough. – OK then, it’s about three inches deep.

“Oh it meets the criteria, so we can get if fixed.

“In fairness, it was fixed the next day, but just imagine how long it will take in the future if you are talking to staff who don’t know the area.

“As for the council, don’t get me started. I honestly thought after all the criticisms from residents reported by yourself and the local press that we would have a new council – and yet they still get voted in and by a little more than skulduggery manage to get control again!

“God help us for the next five years.”

***

Finally, for once we are grateful to Boston's Goody Two Shoes News (circulation 784) for taking us back to our childhood with a photo in Wednesday’s edition.

It showed Boston Mayor, Councillor Richard Austin, posing with a giant flower as part of yet another daft Transported stunt called the Boston Gateway Project.

Instantly we were transported ourselves ... back in time to Coronation year –  and the televised antics of Bill and Ben, the Flowerpot Men and their squeaky-voiced sidekick the Little Weed.

 

If you’ve not seen a photo of him before, the Mayor is in the picture on the left hand side of our montage.