Businesses get

the BID-dle

finger!

It seems that once again Boston BID – the Business Improvement District foisted on a large chunk of Boston businesses whether they like it or not – is trying to give as many members the finger as it possibly can.
At the beginning of the year, the BID’s board  formed a sub committee to organise an “Eastern European event” at a reported cost of around £30,000 – but by all accounts nothing ever came of it.
However, it seems that once the BID sets it mind on a party, nothing will stand in its way – especially not the press-ganged members who must pay 1p in the pound of their rateable value to fund it – or be dragged through the courts by Boston Borough Council and fined.
The BID’s latest cunning plan is to sling £10,000 of members’ hard earned cash at a free party in Central Park – according to manager Niall Armstrong “ so not only do people have a good time but maybe our members see increased takings.”
He also added that the BID was “only” supplying £10,000 because it was the members’ money. “If it bombs, then effectively they could accuse us of wasting £10,000, and they would have a valid claim for that, but by the same token we have got to take a risk.”
We questioned that at the time – and we still do.
Now it seems that the members are questioning it too – in many cases because they knew nothing about the plan until they read of it in the local press.
Until February, members have at least been able to access decisions taken by the BID board by visiting their website.
Since then, no meeting details have been published.
This issue - among others -was taken up by Boston accountant Darron Abbott – a long-standing campaigner where the BID is concerned – and he asked Mr Armstrong several questions concerning the way the company is run – including the absence of board meeting minutes for the past five months.
Mr Armstrong - theoretically the man where the buck stops - passed the buck.  He handed the enquiry to local solicitors Sills and Betteridge who sent Mr Abbott an arrogant e-mail which dismissed the absence of board miniutes thus:.
“Minutes of the meetings of the board of directors of the company will no longer be available on the company’s website. There is no requirement that a company publish such minutes.”
Mr Abbott also raised the issue of the holding of an AGM – and was again given an abrupt brush off. Previous AGMs have been staged in June or July-ish – which would apparently mean that one is now overdue.
“Private companies that are not traded companies need not hold annual general meetings.”
It goes on to say that the only requirement is for the company to hold an AGM “in each period of twelve months beginning with the day following its accounting reference date.”
This means that it could be as late as March 31st next year – and notifications will be sent out to “those entitled to attend and vote” a fortnight before the meeting.
Whether or not this includes members is unclear – as is the authorship of the letter.
Its reference is “JRC” – and we would venture that had “JRC” not entered the law, he or she could have been a doctor with writing like that.

How civil it would have been to let the recipient know your name. How discourteous simply not to bother.
Earlier this year a committee of Boston Borough Council – convened to look at the BID and the way it was run – concluded as its first and most important recommendation: “An overall improvement is required in communications between all persons involved within the BID company.”
Boston Borough Council does not run Boston BID – but it acts as debt collector, paymaster and enforcer – which is a substantial part of the operation.
It also has a senior officer on the BID’s elite nine-person decision-making board.
By association, the council is letting the BID get away with riding roughshod over its members – at a time of economic uncertainty both nationally and locally with the hugely adverse effect of the Market Place refurbishment scheme.
We hope that having once looked at the BID operation and made important and much needed recommendations, that the council does not remain supine in this latest ignorant assault on local business.
The council needs to offer them support – not condone such rough handling.

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