Lerwick town centre

[suuusssiiieee]

Living Lerwick i think most would agree are not fit for purpose - that cringe worthy video they released a while back said it all.

 

Give the shop owners a break and stop fleecing them for fees that give zilch back in return.

 

Who gives Living Lerwick the power to threaten a business who doesn't want to pay their charge? Are they the mafia in disguise? 

[BigMouth]

The Scottish Government give them the power.

 

SNP bad and all that.

[Lerwick antiques]

The bill gets issued through the SIC. I believe they do have an act through parliament, but, for that to stand much weight then you would have had to sign up to Living Lerwick. Which, as far as my knowledge goes, no one has. Them saying you have to pay if you have a building in the BID are doesn't seem good enough to have any weight. Wonder who decided what buildings would be in the BID area? 

 

The Living Lerwick would NOT have got through if it wasn't for the council having a 6 votes for public toilets, taxi rank, town hall, bressay ferry waiting room etc. Wonder who voted for Living Lerwick on these places? maybe a conflict of interest? on the councils part.

Edited January 28, 2018 by Lerwick antiques

[Ghostrider]

The Living Lerwick would NOT have got through if it wasn't for the council having a 6 votes for public toilets, taxi rank, town hall, bressay ferry waiting room etc.

 

Is that not more than a bit disengenous in the first place.

 

Okay, those are buildings within the BID area which provide public 'services', and as proprietors of them there is probably a decent enough case to be made for the SIC to be represented on the membership of LL, being as they are additional services which could influence LL plans and their eventual outcomes. But not being businesses in and of themseves, I don't think they should have voting rights, and certainly not a vote per site - its a wonder they don't have a vote per street, road and pavement in the area as well, as the potential influence of any one of those on bona fide businesses is immensely greater than either a hut at the Bressay ferry ramp or the Town Hall building.

 

Maybe its just me, but given that BID is supposed to stand for 'business improvement district' surely it should be the existing businesses who decide what does or doesn't happen, and the local authority as public services provider relegated to a form of associate membership for liasing and advisory purposes only. Certainly not being in the position they appear to be in, of having such a large chunk of the vote they can largely dictate the direction things take.

 

Whoever originally set up LL has effectively allowed an organisation to be created that is for a lot of occasions nothing more than an SIC puppet.

Edited January 28, 2018 by Ghostrider

[Lerwick antiques]

Living Lerwick claims to be an independent organization with no connection to SIC.

 

Now, why are the SIC issuing the levy bills? why were SIC giving them £10,000 per year plus a office? why is the SIC so keen on backing them?

 

Wonder where the LL managers yearly wage comes from? the SIC? or out of the shops levy payments?

[Suffererof1crankymofo]

Living Lerwick claims to be an independent organization with no connection to SIC.

 

Now, why are the SIC issuing the levy bills? why were SIC giving them £10,000 per year plus a office? why is the SIC so keen on backing them?

 

Wonder where the LL managers yearly wage comes from? the SIC? or out of the shops levy payments?

 

Living Lerwick has an operating agreement with the SIC.  The SIC are responsible for issuing the levy bills in accordance with that agreement.

 

I'd be going through every single blooming bit of legislation pertaining to BIDs because they surely must have a conflict of interest and I'd be contacting the ombudsman.  As for Living Lerwick new managers wanting to start from scratch, perhaps all those not in favour could let them know that they didn't recognise their authority/status and give them the total cold shoulder and refer them to your Landlord; after all, they can pay the subs, doesn't have to be the Tenants by the looks of it ... although I could obviously be wrong.  I mean, the Scotland BIDs website makes reference to consulting with businesses to form a BID; how can they enforce (extortion?) you paying into a club you don't want to be a member of when you've never been consulted if a new business moving into a BID area?  The answer ...

 

... empty shops, doing exactly the opposite of what a BID is meant to do.  It is a deterrent to some businesses; why move into an area where you have to pay an additional levy when up the road you don't and get better footfall?

 

EDIT:

Not everyone can move out of the street but if businesses can afford to move, just how many empty properties (and therefore no rent payable to the landlords) does it take before the landlords get peeved off?  So what if they do threaten to take you to Court?  Is having the bailiffs in your shop the image that Living Lerwick wish to portray?  Just make sure there's the telly cameras and press present when they turn up.

 

Living Lerwick = final nail in the coffin for the street.

 

Edited January 29, 2018 by Suffererof1crankymofo

[Ghostrider]

^ They might want to reword that a bit - Trade Descriptions Act, and all that....

 

While LL may well be a seperate organisation and not wholly under the direct control of the Council, they are anything but independent of the Council, not when the Council has a block vote within the organisation, and is involved with it on a number of other levels.

 

As an outsider looking in, and if I've picked up on this thing correctly, as I probably haven't as I've not really paid it all that much attention. What I'm seeing when all the fluff and fancy 'Living Lerwick' talk is stripped away, is the businesses within the BID area have had their business rates raised by the back door, and they're not getting anything back for that raise than they were getting before, overall it may even be less. Meanwhile those same businesses are locked in to an organisation where on occasion, not they but the Council are the ones who dictate how its going to be, as was very ably demonstrated in the recent vote where had the Council not had their block vote of six, the count would have gone the other way for extending for another five years.

 

Bottom line....The only real winners I'm seeing at the end of the day, is the Council, as the LL subs/back door business rate hike/call it what you will now pays them to do teh same around the street as they used to have to find funding for from other income sources, plus they're placed in a favourable position to keep the arrangeent going as long as possible, even when the majority of bona fide businesses forced in to paying the extra levy don't want it to continue.

 

Why on earth did those who originally agreed to set up LL in the first place agree that LL would take responsibility and pay for things the Council did already, and have always done, financed out of the funding they get anyway will always be a mystery to me, especially when there were some experienced and successful business people leading up the whole thing.

 

A cynic might say that the main reason the Council forced through a second term is so that they can fob the cost of replacing/upgrading the pointless and useless CCTV on to LL who'll have to raise subs to cover it....but I'm sure there are no cynics here, so I'm not sure why I even mentioned that.....

Edited January 29, 2018 by Ghostrider

[ETLerwick]

Well, howdy.

 

A lively topic with articulate contributors -- even those who  mis-spell Shedlanders and mis-use tram . . . 

 

How about a town hall meeting, with the purpose being to craft A Goal For Lerwick. There appear to be many interests pulling in many different directions.

 

Locals/ cruise ship passengers/ political civil servants -- all working on the same 'nut', and with diverging interests/ goals/ wants/ needs -- and opinions.

 

Where would such a meeting take place and who would organize it?

 

A room full of passionate people willing to talk to each other, work in teams/ committees in order to move smartly into the future for the benefit of all?

 

That's what I think.

 

What thinketh thee?

[George.]

Well, howdy.

 

A lively topic with articulate contributors -- even those who  mis-spell Shedlanders and mis-use tram . . . 

 

How about a town hall meeting, with the purpose being to craft A Goal For Lerwick. There appear to be many interests pulling in many different directions.

 

Locals/ cruise ship passengers/ political civil servants -- all working on the same 'nut', and with diverging interests/ goals/ wants/ needs -- and opinions.

 

Where would such a meeting take place and who would organize it?

 

A room full of passionate people willing to talk to each other, work in teams/ committees in order to move smartly into the future for the benefit of all?

 

That's what I think.

 

What thinketh thee?

I think that there is a difference between a sentence and a paragraph, whether the misspelling is obvious or not.

Edited January 29, 2018 by George.

[Guest tiodylb17]

Whats going on with the old pizza place that closed down not long ago , they seem to be working in that building just now ?

[John Allan]

Well, howdy.

 

A lively topic with articulate contributors -- even those who  mis-spell Shedlanders and mis-use tram . . . 

 

How about a town hall meeting, with the purpose being to craft A Goal For Lerwick. There appear to be many interests pulling in many different directions.

 

Locals/ cruise ship passengers/ political civil servants -- all working on the same 'nut', and with diverging interests/ goals/ wants/ needs -- and opinions.

 

Where would such a meeting take place and who would organize it?

 

A room full of passionate people willing to talk to each other, work in teams/ committees in order to move smartly into the future for the benefit of all?

 

That's what I think.

 

What thinketh thee?

 

I thinketh that you may have lost a few peoples attention by the end of your second sentence  

[Lerwick antiques]

Most shop owners including myself want to see the back of Living Lerwick.

 

Time for shop keepers to pull together.

 

Us shop keepers that are not happy need to pull together and get some letters/articles in the Shetland Times and maybe even go on protest.

[Ghostrider]

^ Maybe time to resurrect the former 'Retailer's Association' again. I daresay it had its faults and shortcomings too, but at least it managed to get a few things done and didn't create the negativity and ill-feeling LL has.

 

Things seem to have gone right down the tubes since the Council became an integral player and everybody was signed up to a national 'one size fits all' scheme.

 

Working wholly independently of anyone or anything else, and only coming in to contact with the Council to lobby and berate them, the old Retailers thing seemed to have functionality and purpose most of the time up to certain and varyng levels, LL has neither

[audi-ya-do]

There is an organisation in America that extract money off business owners for little or no return. It's called the Mafia!!!

[blue beetle]

I don't claim to understand the politics of it all and I know you cant turn back the clock . But personally as a small boy living in Whalsay in the seventies it was a huge thrill going to Lerwick for a day. There was nowhere more vibrant and welcoming than commercial street . You could get nearly anything you wanted and the shop keepers were known to one and all. We always seemed to be welcome then unlike now. I for one try to avoid Lerwick now unless I have no other option and if I do have to venture past Grantfield I still do all I can to avoid the street. The powers that be really couldn't have done any more to destroy the desire to shop in Lewick than if they put up barbwire fences. No wonder the shop owners are struggling. Its very sad. And none of the faceless destroyers are ever held  accountable for their  decisions.