Does council fear Stump will take money and run?

Tonight's cabinet meeting has to grasp the poisoned chalice of which voluntary groups to help with grants. The council already funds Boston Citizens Advice Bureau and the South Lincolnshire Community Volunteer Service and has been helping Boston Community Transport, better known as dial-a-ride ... but this latter contribution is not ongoing, and at an earlier debate it was declared poor value for money. Also on the table are bids from three other organisations - Blackfriars, Boston Stump and Centrepoint. It is being recommended to fund an appeal by Centrepoint in full because of its vital role in the current financial climate.

And the cabinet is being offered the following options:

1: Part fund more than one of the other schemes and suggest a split. 2: Cease funding Boston Community Transport and fund other bids.

3: Cease funding all other schemes making a revenue saving. The Blackfriars bid is for £50,000, but even this level of help will leave them in deficit. Centrepoint needs £6,000 to help cover rising costs.

And the Stump is appealing for £12,000 to enhance the Church’s tourism work in line with the 2009 celebration of 700th anniversary.

Recently we were told that Blackfriars would be offering townsfolk everything from "warbling to wrestling" and we question whether hurling money into this bottomless bit to provide such cultural gems is really worth it. And don't be fooled by the results of a so-called "survey" which showed a majority favouring giving cash to Blackfriars. These surveys usually total few participants, and, as we saw when a website petition was started on the theatre's behalf a year ago a small number of luvvies make a lot of noise.

Centrepoint provides a regrettably necessary lifeline in these troubled times, and doubtless eases some of the responsibilities for helping the homeless that would otherwise fall upon the borough council at a much higher cost.

Granting the appeal by St Botolph's would be a good thing to do in its significant anniversary year, and the church has also withdrawn an ongoing appeal for £11,000 towards its insurance cover for this year.

Interestingly, the council is legally obliged to give the church £30,000 per year for the chancel upkeep. - a requirement which goes back to medieval times, and which the borough is trying to wriggle out of.

The decision facing the cabinet is a classic judgement of Solomon.

For what it's worth, we think that dial-a-ride - whilst a useful service - is becoming unaffordably expensive. To part fund it would mean more reductions in the service which would make it even less cost effective.

We have no problems funding the Centrepoint appeal, and the organisation does not routinely put its hand out for cash - this is its first appeal for a couple of years.
Blackfriars is another money pit like the PRSA and should be avoided.

We feel that not to help the stump would be bad PR in this special year, and the net increase being sought is only £1,000. Not only that, but we suspect that the council will seize the opportunity to withdraw funding towards insurance costs in future years as it has not been sought this year.

But could the council fear that the church plans to do a runner with the money?

If not, why else does it refer to St Boltophs in every one of the seven references in the report?This is clearly lack of knowledge rather than a one off typo - and reminds us of the recent website naming of Sir Thomas Meddlecott rather than Middlecott.

More seriously it makes us wonder what hope is there for a council whose staff cannot even spell the name of its most famous landmark correctly.

Write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mail will be treated in confidence if requested.