CABS legacy . . .

[DRiddle]

Much has been made of the BIS by Akers-Belcher. https://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/business/see-inside-hartlepool-s-exciting-new-bis-centre-aimed-at-boosting-town-s-creative-industries-and-business-1-9754910

The peacocking by CAB in the opening of the centre was typical of him. However, missed out amongst the press releases and mutual back slapping was one important detail.

Costings.

I hinted at it yesterday on another thread that the LACK of boasting about bringing it in on budget suggested to me it must have came in OVER budget.

Within an hour of my message information is leaking out of HBC suggesting I was right.

The word is the project went over budget by . . . . £1 million.

The BIS will indeed stand for many years as a reminder of Akers-Belcher's stint as 'leader'.

How do you get your costing projections wrong by a million pounds?

I'm also told the BIS isn't the only regeneration project running hugely over budget at present.

One project running a million quid over budget could be careless.

But two running simultaneously BOTH running over budget by figures heading towards 7 figures?

Some might see that as a bit Shady.

[the_exile]

If it is true that they went £1 million over budget, then hard long qustions have to be asked.

A building of that size in that area having in excess of £1 million spent on it to refurbish into small start up units, becomes a building with prohibitavely high rental charges if the owner is to make a return on their investment!!!!!!

My prediction here, if they charge a commercial rent to return a yield in line with those experienced by proper developers the units will remain empty.........resulting in yet another burden to the town and a lasting reminder of the F**kwits who have run the Town into the ground.

Or

They will charge rent at a rate to attract start up businesses, which wont produce any kind of yield and the costs of refurbishment will be left ad a burden on the Town. Again a lasting reminder of the f**kwits who have ran this town into the ground.

Having looked at the interior shots, it would be good to see a breakdown of the tenders and contracts awarded for this work which has cost £1 million more than originally budgeted. It just doesnt add up!!!!! Like so many other things touched by sag eye and his hubby

[Land Phil]

Why do they think artists are pursuing careers outside Hartlepool and they need to retain them here ?
Is it because there is nothing like the BIS for them or is it because there is nobody in Hartlepool with the cash to support them with their custom ?

I would love to see a flourishing commercial artist community in Hartlepool but wonder if we can support it if we can't even support a M&S clothes department. 

Recouping the £3-4 million can never be realistic or as the council puts it commercially sensitive.

[DRiddle]

For what it's worth i quite like the BIS, both in terms of the internal design and the general concept of it all. It looks like it's got that 'Dragon's Den' feel about it and if i was a young creative person it would be really attractive in terms of starting out. There is obviously going to be an issue of affordability in terms of leasing the premises. But I imagine the logic behind any potential subsidised rents is the likelihood of additional job creation via business growth etc. 

I wouldn't be too put off by the relative lack of affluent consumers in Hartlepool. Obviously it depends on the product but even start ups can access global markets for sales of products and services etc. 'Creative industries' is a very broad term so i imagine they're hoping to attract many diverse businesses rather than just artists.

As for the reported million pound overspend though. . . who knows how that happened.

[diSme]

I also quite like how it's been done. It is something of a gamble though...

Who is going to be running the place on a daily basis? If it's down to the council, then I'm dubious as to whether it will ever make a return, which must be the ultimate goal surely....?

I don't think it was the best way to spend funds, but I do genuinely hope it becomes a long term project that reaps rewards for the town.

That said, the £1million over budget is a question that seriously needs to be addressed, particularly in these times of 'austerity'.

How did the overspend occur? What caused it? Who was responsible? It's not exactly pocket change is it.....

The current council would achieve so much more respect if such questions were answered openly and honestly.

[Inspector Knacker]

I'm glad the building has been saved and a use found, but where's the business starter units/workshop facilities, business parks etc, or had the 'fine time Fontaine's' planned for a genteel high tea dormitory town status planned for Hartlepool?
Sadly the only thing coming into town are columns of wagons full of crap to be re-cycled, that I imagine being a green industry in their eyes.

[Foradmin]

Brougham Terrace a good idea and works well but does it make any money or even pay for itself?

The BIS is similarly a good idea but will it pay for itself? Doubtful.

As for overspends........ spends on the Shades, the next door takeaway and, I think, some spend on the accommodation block opposite were 'executive' decisions and didn't go to full Council. Can anybody confirm this? Any other examples of 'executive' spends?

Will the 'new' Cllr regime explain these spends and others and really become

                 OPEN?  TRANSPARENT?    ACCOUNTABLE?.     

Then there is the Inspiration cafe and nursery overspend and running deficit. A prime example of wasted money and bad management.

Perhaps the 'new' regime can look into the Rifty and Mycafe possible malfeasance?

[Inspector Knacker]

The 'windfall'  from the Tees Valley, who exactly decided how that money was spent.

My one concern is the figure of £10m given to us begs the question what else do we get money wise. That's a very small share of the pot and as far as I can see we're not in line for any major projects for the area, they're in the other boroughs. What sort of case did our 'representatives' put forward. They're hardly the worlds best negotiators, given the things the towns lost, like a meaningful hospital, courts etc, they all went without so much a whimper.
I get the awful feeling sometimes the whole Tees Valley thing has a hint of Cleveland County Council about it.

[Lord Elpus]

One person who did well out of the deal was the local business man who sold the building to HBC.

[mk1]

............is sowing discord. Apparently there is a  tipper-lorry on the promenade quietly dumping a load of surplus principles into the sea.

Never underestimate how low a politician (of any stripe) can go when they get a chance to take control. 

Any bets on who is having the red-robes for next year dangled before them?

[Land Phil]

His legacy will be an MP chosen by Ben Houchen.
He has handed it to Ben on a plate along with the help of the departed poison dwarf.

[Inspector Knacker]

His legacy will have been to turn local government into an unfunny poor man's Carry on film. A comedy of the ridiculous that shouldn't have lasted as long as it did.
A posturing, pouting era of political pigmy's parading their grand vision, which were anything but. An era of stagnation.
An shining example of what happens when you vote for the Party not the candidate.

[fred c]

The Corbyn Pixies are still voting for the party before the town, 2 labour committee chairs have been denied the opportunity to carry on their good work over the last couple of years, why have they been denied that opportunity, who made that decision.

A HCLP official offered the explanation on FB that it was labours financial budgeting that was responsible for the success, nothing has changed with labour they are just coming from a different direction.

The Party obviously have no intention of putting the welfare of the town and it's residents first they have made it crystal clear that there primary aim for the next 12 months is to make it as difficult as possible for the leading group.

[Inspector Knacker]

The Corbyn Pixies are still voting for the party before the town, 2 labour committee chairs have been denied the opportunity to carry on their good work over the last couple of years, why have they been denied that opportunity, who made that decision.

The sole aim of these people is to gain power and hold onto it.
Loyalty to the Party creed trumps everything else. There are no dilemmas.
The mute loyalists tolerated the cabal for years, even when seeing the 'bleeding obvious', they carried on backing them because they were all part of their Party.
After the catastrophic election results they still stood transfixed.
The comedic irony was that the cabal flounced away, they dismissed themselves while the Party still flounders.

[DRiddle]

the Party still flounders

They (Labour) do seem to be lacking a tactical nous in some key areas. Some of their actual electoral campaigns in recent years have been very questionable. Anne Marshall's crack at Seaton for example. . . a disaster. Eileen Kendon having THREE cracks at winning Hart even offering to do it for FREE and losing the lot. A disaster. The whole debacle which some campaigning as Labour candidates but using leaflets and campaign literature which seemed to disassociate themselves with the party. Seemingly thinking having no Conservative candidate in De Bruce would help them . . . it didn't. Flooding Foggy Frurze with Cranney's mates and taking votes away . . . from Cranney. lol.

It makes you wonder who is coming up with these ideas.