Spalding nursery owner says she never received ballot in Spalding Business Improvement District vote
A nursery owner says she never received ballot papers on whether a town centre business group should be formed - and is now being forced to pay a near £300 levy for this.
Rachel Beresford fears that more firms in the town centre missed out on the opportunity to have their say in last year’s vote on whether Spalding Business Improvement District - which is funded by a levy on traders - should have been formed.
The BID — which organisers promised could raise £1million over five years to help boost the fortunes of the town — was brought in as a result of a very narrow ballot last summer, with just one vote tipping the balance. A total of 115 votes were cast from a business community of more than 400 during the ballot, with 58 in favour.
Rachel, who runs Munchkins Kindergarten in Priory Road, said her original ballot paper or its replacement ever arrived before the deadline of June 28 last year - despite chasing the organisers and the electoral company which was running the ballot.
South Holland District Council was responsible for the ballot and has been informed by Civica, an electoral services provider, that every business who requested a ballot was sent out at the first legally allowed date of June 24 - just four days before the deadline. But the council says it wants to hear from businesses who feel they have missed out on the vote.
A group of traders came together for a meeting last week, following the creation of the Spalding Against BID Facebook page, to question the validity of the vote along with raising their anger at levy which some labelled as an unaffordable burden. The first bills - which have been backdated to September - have been delivered and are expected to be paid in full by the end of the month.
Rachel said: “I chased and chased the vote but it never came.
“There were four other businesses in a similar situation at the meeting. So the five missed votes would have made a huge difference to the voting.”
Rachel shared emails with this website to show that she had chased Mosaic Partnership - the company which had been brought in to do the feasibility study and oversee the BID process - on two occasions.
She sent an email on June 11 to state that she has not received her ballot papers.
This was followed up with another email on June 14 when Rachel said: “I emailed earlier in the week to say we haven’t had our ballot papers yet but I am still waiting a response.”
Three days later on June 17, Rachel received a response from Mosaic director Mo Aswat, who told her that she would need to fill in an form, which was attached, for Civica to issue replacement ballot papers.
Rachel has shared a copy of the completed form with this website.
The next email she receives is on June 24 - four days before the June 28 deadline - from Civica to acknowledge her request for a replacement form.
But Rachel says this never arrived.
She said: “How many other people did not receive a vote at all? We were a small percentage of business owners at the recent meeting - so my guess is that it potentially would be a lot more who never even got the chance to vote!”
The district council says the ballot process was managed with a high level of process and checks.
A spokesman said: “The council was responsible for the ballot and takes any reports of issues with the electoral process extremely seriously. We would ask anyone who is concerned to contact us directly, with as much information as possible, so it can be properly investigated between us and our electoral services provider.
“The BID ballot process was managed with the same high level of process and checks attached to any other election, with a verified list of data provided to Civica, our electoral services provider, who then carried out the balloting procedure with the council’s returning officer overseeing this throughout.”
The council later came back to us to state that having checked with Civica ‘every business that requested a lost ballot was sent one by post on the earliest legally allowed date’ - which was June 24. It also stated that all eligible businesses were contacted ‘regularly’ throughout the ballot process.
Catherine Duce, of Spalding Business Board, said they would be willing to meet with traders.
She said: “The ballot process for the Business Improvement District was administered and overseen by South Holland District Council and is separate to the work and operation of the BID Board, which is open for contribution from business owners across the town centre.
“This initiative can only be a success with the support and collaboration of the town centre businesses it is designed for, and we will happily look to meet with any who wish to in due course to answer their questions and discuss the plans, challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
“We are always open to any suggestions, involvement or feedback that businesses wish to provide. This is a positive chance for change for us all, and it is important we are able to have the constructive, two-way dialogue necessary to make these ambitions a success, and ensure it delivers the best possible value to us all.”
