After the blog appeared, we were sent a copy of a job advert pictured above for a new co-ordinator for the team.
The closing date for applications was 31st October
followed by interviews just a week later.
Dates as close together as these often appear when an
appointment has already been decided, and the procedure is mere formality.
Having said that, if an appointment had been made on 7th
November, we would have thought that the news would have been publicised by
now.
Given the output demanded of a two-day week, it might also
have been the case that no-one bothered to reply.
After all, who in their right mind would think it remotely
possible to achieve all the requirements of the job in just two working days?
These include: setting up and chairing bi-monthly meetings, recruiting
new board members, organising and managing at least four events a year, writing
quarterly newsletters, liaising with Worst Street, encouraging town centre
businesses to take part in town centre activities and sponsor events and
initiatives, producing promotional material for events/competitions, and
securing funding for the Boston Town Team.
We’ve seen adverts like this before – and the bottom line is that they rely on
the post holder working however long it take to meet the targets – and in this
case it could be considerably more than just two days.
Perhaps the timing of the vacancy goes some way to
explaining why the Town Team appears to have done next to nothing where
Boston’s Christmas celebrations are concerned
– and we wonder whether there is a co-ordinator in place or not … and if
so who they are and what they are doing.
***
Our last blog also questioned whether local businesses would be able or willing to
find up to £8,000 every year for the knock-on costs of celebrating Christmas in
Boston now that Worst Street has bunged the Town Team £35k for lighting.
A palpable clue came in a comment from former Councillor
Carol Taylor who told us that two years ago she and Councillor Paul Gleeson
sought sponsorship for the Christmas celebrations.
“A big company kindly agreed to sponsor some of the tree
lights for two years,” she told us.
“Another sponsorship came from B&Q who supplied 12 Xmas
trees, 12 sets of 100 lights and delivered them to the businesses on Church
Street.
"Councillor Stuart Ashton made the wall brackets for them and
one of his team and I put the brackets up as well as the trees.
“I paid for the brackets out of my councillor’s allowance.
“The following year only one of the businesses put a tree up
– even though they all still have their lights and B&Q would have supplied
more trees for with a large discount.
“This street couldn't be bothered and wanted it all done for
them.
“Sadly there is a huge disrespect and dislike for Boston
Borough Council by Pescod Square businesses and other businesses who will
continue to work against the council ... not wanting to work with them for the
greater good.
“There are two groups of people who should get off their
backsides and work harder though. These are the current elected councillors and
the Boston Town team.
"Boston should stop completely blaming the council; it is the
businesses as well.”
***
This is Heckington’s tree.
This village of just over 3,000 people will celebrate its
150th annual show next year – claimed to be the largest village show
in the country ... which regularly draws more than 30,000 visitors.
Boston was once home to the then peripatetic Lincolnshire
Show – but when the Lincolnshire Agricultural
Society located to a permanent site in 1959 … near Lincoln ... never tried to create its own local effort.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
***
Still with things Christmassy – another sign that Boston
Borough Council has given up the Ghost of Christmas Past is the absence of a
promotional calendar for the town.
Its first effort appeared two years ago – and Boston Eye was among
the local organisations to sponsor a page top cover production costs.
As Worst Street was writing the press release, the
publication was a major success – and we understand that if certain councillors
had paid forall their copies it would have been even more so.
A second calendar appeared last year – although Boston Eye was not invited
to contribute … and again helped local charities through its sale.
This year …
Nothing, nada.
The calendar was purportedly a cost neutral production, so
its non-appearance this year ought not be due to economics.
So … it is an oversight, forgetfulness, indifference – something that could form the Worst Street motto.
In fact, in Latin, it sounds even more impressive …. providentes
oblivione, neglegentia.
***
Another item we mentioned last week was the Quadrant
application amendment – and the fact that objectors had been given scarcely any
time to respond. Not only that, but despite a promise to the contrary, details
were not available on the borough website, and the only to view the plans
was to travel to the council offices.
Now we learn of another inconvenient little hiccup – inconvenient
for the villagers, that is.
Apparently, Wyberton Parish Council did not receive any
update or amendment details because they were sent to a previous Clerk who left
more than two years ago.
We would have thought that if communications had been sent
to the wrong person throughout that time, someone would have noticed, and the
mistake corrected – especially with so many borough councillors also “serving”
the parish.
So is it a case that for some strange reason this latest
change of plan to the Quadrant project was alone in going to the wrong address
and causing an unnecessary delay?
Fate forefend.
***
A straw-grasping entry on the Worst Street website, tells us
that: “Boston Borough Council's binmen are among the best-known of the authority's
frontline ambassadors …”
We wonder how far down the list our local councillors are
ranked …
***
Perhaps things might improve if they paid more attention to
their constituents.
We noted the minutes of a recent planning committee dealing
with declaration of interests.
Councillor Stephen Woodliffe (he who must be fully worshipped) declared having received
e-mails about applications, “but it was his practice not to read them
and kept (sic) an open mind.”
So how is his thought process shaped when make-your-mind-up-time
arrives?
The only way we can find that objections to applications are
summarised is in an officer report.
One that we looked at recently included an objection which
was quoted thus: “When we constructed our chalet bungalow, we were required to
install obscure glazing to avoid overlooking.”
Presumably there is more to this statement – but if there
is, it was omitted, and we fail to see how it served any useful purpose … let
alone assist councillors in coming to a decision.
Voters regard their councillor as their eyes, ears and voice
in local matters – and to ignore them “to keep an open mind” (when
the reverse seems to be true) is to do them great disservice.
***
A new reader e-mailed last week to say: “After ten years of living in Boston, I
recently came across your blog and now look forward to your observations as to
the 'workings' of the Boston Borough Council residing in 'Worst Street.’
“My latest observation is the apparent generosity of some incumbent
to supply dog owners with 'free’ dog poo bags and to self-congratulate
themselves when stocks have to be regularly replenished and the hypocrisy with
which we ratepayers are told that it is only fair that green waste bins are
paid for by people who use them and not subsidised by people who don't.”
It’s a good point – and one which reminded us that during
the 2013 floods, Worst Street went to great lengths to tell us that it did not
provide sandbags whilst employing ample stocks to protect its own property.
***
Whilst we always welcome comments about our blog, a couple from
someone calling him/herself “Proud of
Boston” will not be appearing. PoB claims not to be a reader – but was “prompted”
to take a look by a friend. That’s one we’ve never heard before!
Both comments are lengthy and – doubtless due to the writer’s
self-confessed lack of familiarity with Boston
Eye – totally fail to appreciate what we are all about.
To publish the comments and then rebut them would be a waste
of space and an embarrassment to the sender, so we are not going to bother.
Incidentally, Proud of
Boston, “wingers” play in football teams.
We think the word that you were groping for in your harangue
was “whingers.”
***
Finally, proof at last that someone in Worst Street reads Boston Eye despite claims to the
contrary.
Last Wednesday, our Forgotten
Boston feature showed the excessively leafy lane alongside John Adams Way
where it runs next to the Cattle Market car park.
Not anymore.
By Friday the path had been cleared – and what a difference
our picture shows.
Well done whoever acted so quickly.
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
We are on Twitter
– visit @eye_boston
I wonder what type of impression an altogether cheerless Market Place must have left on the many visitors to the town for the BBC Radio Lincolnshire Carol Service, last night?
ReplyDeleteHaving spent a rather depressing walk around the Town this morning, I can only say that your point about the cost of the Mayoral Office is well made.
ReplyDeleteNow, there is £80,000 pa that could be far better spent - despite Worst Street's ham-fisted attempt at town management.