Councils’ Vested Interest in YCBID
A Letter to the Editor from Mr WILLIAM PARKIN of Staithes, outlining his objections to the continuing existence of Yorkshire Coast BID Ltd.
Firstly, I am not a Levy Payer – but I have plenty of friends who are.
To me, it is a sorry state that the whole debacle is in the position it is. The losers here are the FORCED Levy Payers, who will be picking up the bill for the Court Cases and, from what I understand, the poorly prepared Barrister for the Council who can pass on all costs to the BID Quango.
Also, how much time has been wasted by the Scarborough and East Yorkshire Council’s Senior Management along with their clerical teams on totally non-productive effort trying to justify the wrong decision made three years ago to support a flawed Vanity Project.
What makes it even more galling is that, in the original Mosaic Document, it states:
“It is better to start small, under promise and over deliver”.
(First paragraph, Page 26: http://www.yorkshirecoastbid.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Yorkshire-Coast-DBID-Feasibility-Report-2015.pdf )
When first mooted, a friend of mine pointed out to Ms Carruthers that it would not work; specifically, because of the geography involved, as it is too big – about 100 miles long – and at that time, with Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council still involved, that you cannot answer to more than one Master.
Indeed, this is proving to be the case. Ms Carruthers should have listened to people who know the area and are involved with tourism. However, as she was trying to create a fancy-titled position for herself, she brushed all that to one side.
Successful BIDs are tight-knit, and have only a few specific reasons to exist – the less the better – and certainly not relying on projects that seem to be based on Art and Theatre and are not getting more traditional visitors to the area or reviving Town Centres.
I would suggest that thaousands of pounds have been wasted on outside advice trying to keep it afloat and justify the monster they have created.
How much has been paid to Solicitors and other so called ‘Specialists’?
I totally agree with the statement that Mr Rowe-Evans will not want to be cross-examined in a Court of Law, along with Ms Caruthers.
Finally, it was reported that 394 Scarborough FORCED Levy payers have not paid and a further 40 from EYRC.
The operating agreements for Scarborough and ERYC are here:
See the Appendices at the end.
Scarborough charge £130 plus expenses, and ERYC £77.
394 x £130 is £51,220 and 40 x £77 is £3,080, equalling a grand total of £54,300.
Also, who pays for the aborted Court time and future Court and Barrister time?
If YCBID say it’s the Council, then the FORCED Levy Payers are still paying – via their Business Rates and Council Tax payments.
With all the other fees explained at the end of these Agreements, it is a nice little earner for both Councils who have a clear vested interest in perpetuating the BID.
The BID was never needed and definitely isn’t needed now that they are proving they are spending money for the sake of spending money.
“We assist Councils to force BIDs
(Business Improvement Districts) into towns
in order to raise more revenue
out of the businesses.“
Comments are closed.