Apologies were received from Councillors Alex Hall and Danny Brookes.

At this point in the Meeting, Members were invited to declare any relevant interests. 

Declarations were made as follows:

Councillor Robert Watson requested it be noted that in relation to Agenda Item 12 he was on the Board of Directors for Magna Vitae.

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 25th March 2025.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 25^th March 2025 were agreed as a correct record.

To receive a report.

N.B This Item was brought forward at the Chairman’s discretion.

The Chairman welcomed James Gilbert, Assistant Director (Corporate) to present Members with the Annual Report on Use of Consultants 2024/25, pages 1 to 6 of the Supplementary Agenda refer.

The report brought forward details of consultancy commissions in 2024/25 under the definition previously agreed by Overview Committee which was a person commissioned by the Council to provide expert advice or information professionally, and which was not someone employed or contracted to deliver business as usual activities.

Appendix A of the Supplementary Agenda revealed that the Council’s expenditure on consultancy work in the year 2024/25 was £82k.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

• A Member requested further clarification on the definition of a consultant.  In response, the Assistant Director (Corporate) confirmed to Members that the report had been produced in accordance with the definition agreed at the previous Meeting.

• A Member wished to challenge the definition of consultant that was used to compile information in the report and commented that the report did not show an accurate representation for the rate payer where consultants had been utilised due to issues with workforce capacity.

• The Chairman queried whether the definition of a consultant that Members were seeking was people employed by the Council for business as usual when there was not capacity in house.  In response, the Assistant Director (Corporate) advised the Committee that some members of staff were funded from existing staff budgets, for example the role of Interim Consultant for Culture and Regeneration had been created following the departure of the Assistant Director, Economic Growth.

• A Member further stressed that Interim roles were still considered to fall under the definition of consultants and that the report should be presented in the way it had been in the past.  In response, the Chairman explained that the report had been resurrected to address these concerns and that figures for staff that were employed on an interim basis could be requested.   The Assistant Director (Corporate) further confirmed that the definition of a consultant could be broadened.

• The Chairman supported that it was necessary to look at who was employed by the Council on an interim basis and examine the wider issues with recruitment.

• A Member commented that the Council’s spend on consultants of £82k for the year 2024/25 did not seem unreasonable and that it would be beneficial for Members to see comparative figures in relation to other local authorities.  In response, the Assistant Director (Corporate) advised Members that the Finance team needed to identify what was considered a consultant to present the figures for interim management support roles.  Members were reminded that the figures in the report highlighted the shared spend across the Partnership and that East Lindsey District Council had a 46% share of the commissioned work.

• Members further discussed the definition of a consultant and highlighted that interim staff were usually paid more than a permanent member of staff.

• A Member queried whether interim consultant roles  ...  view the full minutes text for item 110.

Actions from the previous Overview Committee Meeting.

Members noted that the following Actions were now complete.

Actions from the Meeting held on 25^th March 2025 Action No. 96(c), 97, 103 and 105 – completed.

Actions from the Meeting held on 28^th January 2025 Action No. 81 – completed.

Actions from the Meeting held on 19^th November 2024 Action No. 64 – completed.

Actions from the Meeting held on 23^rd July 2024 Action No. 28 – completed.

Comments were received as follows:

Action No. 99 (b) – ‘South and East Lincolnshire Councils Partnership Volunteer Scheme Update’ from the Meeting held on 25^th March 2025, page 47 of the Agenda refers.

• A Member expressed further concern with the service that Citizens Advice was providing in Louth.

• Members requested that the Community Manager, South and East Lincolnshire Councils Partnership was made aware that the wording for volunteering opportunities at the Council should be made clearer to show that it referred to volunteering opportunities only at the Council.

Action No. 103 (a) – In reference to the grading of streets in the ‘Quarter 3 24/25 Performance and Risk Report’ from the Meeting held on 25^th March 2025, page 48 of the Agenda refers.

• In reference to the mechanical issue with the Council’s two new LGV road sweepers, a Member queried the reasons that this had occurred.

Action No. 103 (b) – In reference to the KPI’s for visitor number in the ‘Quarter 3 24/25 Performance and Risk Report’ from the Meeting held on 25^th March 2025, page 48 of the Agenda refers.

• A Member queried the reasons that Embassy Theatre and Altitude 44 had not been included in the totals for KPI’s for leisure facilities, page 48 of the Agenda refers.

Action No. 103 (c) – In reference to gym members in the ‘Quarter 3 24/25 Performance and Risk Report’ from the Meeting held on 25^th March 2025, page 48 of the Agenda refers.

• A Member commented that the error with the gym and swim figures should have been identified by officers earlier.

Action No. 103 (d) – In reference to the Kingdom Contract in the ‘Quarter 3 24/25 Performance and Risk Report’ from the Meeting held on 25^th March 2025, page 48 of the Agenda refers.

• A Member queried whether the Council approved the framework for those who were applying penalties.   In response, the Scrutiny and Policy Officer explained to Members that the approval process referred to the Performance Management Framework which was approved by the Council at the beginning of each year.

• Members queried whether the Committee could see sight of the report and whether the framework was approved by Members or the Portfolio Holder.  In response, the Scrutiny and Policy Officer clarified to Members that Officers provided a monthly report which they shared with the respective Portfolio Holders and that the Performance Management Framework was reported separately and was approved by Members at the beginning of the year. 

Action No. 105 (c) – ‘Executive/Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 111.

To receive a report from the Deputy Chief Executive, Programme Delivery.

The Chairman welcomed Adrian Sibley, Deputy Chief Executive (Programme Delivery) to the Meeting to present Members with a Towns Fund Projects Update.  A copy of the presentation is attached at Appendix A to the Minutes.

Members were advised that in 2022, the Council was awarded £50m for Town’s Fund Projects and that today’s update was focused on six projects that were being internally managed by the Council.

Sutton on Sea Colonnade

The Deputy Chief Executive (Programme Delivery) advised Members that the Sutton on Sea Colonnade building was nearing completion and that the play area was due to be ready at the same time as the opening of the paddling pools. 

Members were further advised of the issues which had been experienced with securing an operator for the building and that discussions with a potential operator were now in the advanced stages.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

·         In reference to Recommendation No. 4 from the Recommendation Tracker, the Chairman queried whether an update was available for exploring opportunities with universities and museum services to develop exhibition space within the building, page 99 of the Agenda refers.  In response, the Deputy Chief Executive (Programme Delivery) explained to Members that an update on the programme of activity would be provided with the next Towns Fund Project Update that was presented to the Committee.

·         In reference to Recommendation No. 5 from the Recommendation Tracker, the Chairman highlighted that an update had not been received in relation to landscaping, page 101 of the Agenda refers.  In response, the Deputy Chief Executive (Programme Delivery) confirmed that a landscaping scheme at the Sutton on Sea Colonnade was being deployed all around the building.

·         A Member spoke in support of the update on the Sutton on Sea Colonnade and requested that more information be made publicly available.

·         A Member further requested that efforts were made to ensure that local community groups were kept informed to ensure the success of the project.

In response, the Deputy Chief Executive (Programme Delivery) confirmed that Members’ comments would be taken forward.

·         A Member highlighted the importance of encouraging people to eat healthily in an area of deprivation.

·         A Member further queried whether a healthier food operator could be secured as part of the project.  In response, the Deputy Chief Executive (Programme Delivery) explained to Members that securing a healthy food operator would be challenging when difficulty had already been experienced securing any operator. 

·         Members further discussed the benefits of eating healthy food and considered that the Council could not dictate what people ate.

·         A Member stressed the importance of using local employees and requested further clarification on the circumstances that had led to operators being apprehensive of employing local people.  In response, the Deputy Chief Executive (Programme Delivery) assured Members of the features and activities being put in place at Sutton on Sea, including a new children’s play area, upgraded paddling pool, a cycle store for bike hire and dedicated areas of the building for community engagement.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 112.

To receive a report from the Development Management Lead.

The Chairman welcomed Andy Booth, Development Management Lead to the Meeting to present Members with an update on Section 106 planning obligations, pages 53 to 64 of the Agenda refer.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

• A Member referenced the report considered by the Executive Board in September 2013 as noted at Section 2.29 and commented on the reasons that Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was not previously adopted, page 58 of the Agenda refers.  In response, the Development Management Lead explained to Members that there were many challenges in adopting the CIL regime and that it did not always negate the need to secure Section 106 Planning Agreements.

• The Chairman commented that Parish Councils were under the impression that CILs would provide greater benefits than Section 106 Agreements.  In response, the Development Management Lead advised Members that CILs could provide a range of benefits, especially for towns that had adopted a Neighbourhood Development Plan.  Members were further advised that the differences between CIL and S106 obligations was that S106 Agreements were a precise set of rules that were tailored to the consequences of a particular development, whereas CILs provided a broader range of improvements and benefits for communities that were not tailored to the development itself.

• A Member commented whether some of the income from CILs could provide greater benefits in areas where no developments had taken place, particularly in coastal areas. 

• A Member provided an example of a housing project in Sutton on Sea that was not completed and had two developers leave the project.  In response, the Development Management Lead advised Members that in the circumstances where development had stalled, Section 106 monies would be stored until the next developer was able to continue the project and reach the prescribed triggers points.

• A Member queried whether Section 106 Agreements could pass on from one developer to the next, in the circumstances where a developer terminated their interest in a site.  In response, the Development Management Lead advised Members that the Section 106 Agreement could be modified and reapplied if the development continued in the same context as the original planning permission or alternatively developers could request agreements be removed.  Members were further advised that a robust process was in place to ensure that any proposed changes addressed mitigations that were needed as a consequence of the development.

• A Member further commented that the local community in Mablethorpe had not benefited from the Tesco development and queried the reasons that the Council had not ensured Section 106 Agreements had local advantages.

In response, the Development Management Lead assured Members that certain legal tests had to be fulfilled to what could be secured through Section 106 Agreements.

• A Member queried the report’s conclusion in relation to planning obligations being the best tool available to mitigate the impacts of a development where the use of planning conditions was inappropriate.  In response, the Development Management Lead advised Members that planning conditions were the preferred option and that in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 113.

To receive a report from the Group Manager, Organisational Development.

The Chairman introduced Rachel Robinson, Group Manager (Organisational Development) to present Members with the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, pages 65 to 94 of the Agenda refer.

Members were advised that the purpose of the report was to bring forward the proposed Equality, Diversity & Inclusion (EDI) Strategy (Appendix A) for the South and East Lincolnshire Councils Partnership (SELCP) for 2025-2028.

The strategy had been developed following extensive consultation and was a key recommendation from the Local Government Association Peer Challenge process, which aimed to further develop service provision to ensure that services were accessible to all. 

To implement the strategy, a high-level action plan was required (a copy is attached at Appendix B), pages 85 to 94 of the Agenda refer.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward:

• A Member welcomed the idea of having more female representation on the Council and highlighted that the Executive Board currently had more male than female representation.

• In reference to ‘Our Equality Objectives’ a Member highlighted the need for an additional objective in relation to concerns about the decisions the Council made and the effect those decisions had on other people, page 75 of the Agenda refers.

• A Member further expanded on the need for the Council to consider everyone affected by decisions of the Council including suppliers, subcontractors and participants in procurement processes, and to ensure appropriate training was given to those informing people of Council decisions.

• It was highlighted that the decision for Magna Vitae to commence a Partnership wide leisure operator procurement process in 2024 had been a case study on how not to implement a decision.

• The Chairman commented that it would be beneficial to observe the differences across the Partnership Councils.

• A Member commented that deprivation, particularly along the coastal areas should be recognised in the Council’s Equality Objectives.

• In reference to Appendix Outcome Number 3.7 ‘Ensure that tenants of South Holland District Council are able to report repairs and consider vulnerability in undertaking repairs’, a Member commented that South Holland district were fortunate to benefit from such a service, page 91 of the Agenda refers.

• A Member supported that everyone should be treated equally, and that better control was needed in relation to Platform Housing.

• A Member commented that in light of recent election results, it was essential that the Council stayed committed to communities that were concerned about being divided and that numerous challenges along the coast needed to be combated.

• A Member further highlighted the benefit of the sports centre in Mablethorpe and celebrations of diversity with the East Coast Pride event taking place on Saturday 13^th September 2025.

• A Member highlighted that funding was much needed by some of the smaller inland villages which needed as much support as coastal areas.

• A Member queried the definition of DNA, page 83 of the Agenda refers.  In response, Group Manager (Organisational Development) confirmed to Members that DNA referred to Did Not Answer.

• Members commented in support of the report and discussed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 114.

To receive a verbal update for the Outside Body Appointee.

Councillor Jill Makinson-Sanders, the Outside Body Appointee to the Health Scrutiny Committee (HSC) for Lincolnshire advised Members that there had been no Meetings in May 2025 due to the elections.  Members were further advised that HSC Committee Meetings would restart in June 2025.

N.B Councillor Dick Edginton returned to the Meeting at 12.15pm.

The Chairman looked forward to receiving an update following the next HSC. 

To receive a written update.

Members were referred to the briefing paper, pages 95 to 96 of the Agenda refer.

Members were advised that the Panel met on 26th March 2025 to discuss the evidence gathered and to agree the content required in the final report.  The Panel was meeting for a final time during May to agree the report and recommendations before being presented to Overview Committee in June 2025.

A Scrutiny Panel Member advised the Committee that a large amount of work had already been undertaken.

To receive a written update.

Members were referred to the briefing paper, pages 97 to 98 of the Agenda refer.

The Scrutiny and Policy Officer advised the Committee that the work of the Panel was expected to commence during May 2025 and that it would review current policy and recommend changes to ensure the car parking service remained effective.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

• In reference to the Council’s Constitution, a Member highlighted concerns that Scrutiny Panels should be politically balanced.  In response, the Chairman clarified that the Constitution stated that Scrutiny Panels should politically balanced where possible.  The Scrutiny and Policy Officer further advised Members that the political makeup of the Panel did not prevent work commencing.

• A Member highlighted the difficulties experienced with obtaining Panel Members and setting Meeting dates.  In response, the Scrutiny and Policy Officer advised Members that the recent approach had been to wait until after the elections had taken place to enable more time for Members to participate.

To note the Overview and Scrutiny Recommendation Tracker.

Members were referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Recommendation Tracker, pages 99 to 134 of the Agenda refer.

Members were invited to review the tracker and put their comments and questions forward.

Overview Standing Reference Group

Sutton on Sea Colonnade Project

Recommendation No 4 ‘Explore opportunities with universities and museum services to develop the exhibition space’, page 99 of the Agenda refers.

The Scrutiny and Policy Officer provided Members with a verbal update that the National Portfolio Organisation (NPO) team were preparing a list of events exhibitions for the space for the summer months and years ahead and advised that the work was still in progress.

Recommendation No 5 ‘Include more soft landscaping in the final design, page 101 of the Agenda refers.

The Scrutiny and Policy Officer provided Members with a verbal update that the landscaping for phase one had been concluded, and that the play equipment and wider soft landscaping layout design has been shared with the local community and Ward councillors at community meetings.  It was confirmed that the most recent meeting was 23^rd April 2025.

• A Member commented on the poor communication that Ward Members had received after previously being promised fortnightly updates.

• A Member requested assurance that the play equipment was not made of plastic.  In response, a Member confirmed that equipment was largely made of wood and that the layout had been similar to the equipment at Mablethorpe’s Leisure Centre.

• Members were further advised that the project was being undertaken to enhance the facilities at the King George V playing fields with equipment for older age groups and to provide a new MUGA pitch funded by the Council and the Football Foundation.

• A Member queried the status of the King George V play area.   In response, a Member confirmed that the field was being run as a charity and was being leased to the Playing Fields Association.

• A Member referenced concerns with communication that was identified during the peer review and queried the role of Debbie McLatch, Interim Consultant for Culture and Regeneration.  In response, Councillor Graham Marsh as Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Leisure and Culture, and Carbon Reduction advised Members that Debbie McLatch had replaced Lydia Rusling, Assistant Director (Economic Growth) on a temporary basis.

• Members commented on the difficulties in establishing who to contact and identifying where staff were based. 

To explore the issues surrounding caravan licensing and enforcement

• The Chairman advised Members that the green recommendations were usually removed from the recommendation tracker and that they would remain listed while an annual progress update was expected.

• A Member highlighted the need to address the caravan recommendations in adequate time to become part of the Council’s legacy.

Recommendation No 1 ‘To recognise the need to make Caravan Enforcement a priority for the new Council, with the first priorities dealing with the issue of unauthorised occupancy and to review and strengthen licence conditions’, page 103 of the Agenda refers.

• A Member commented on concerns for capacity within the organisation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 117.

To receive a copy of the Executive/Council Forward Plan.

Members were presented with the Executive/Council Forward Plan 2024-25, pages 135 to 144 of the Agenda refer and were invited for their comments.

• In reference to the Household Support Fund, a Member highlighted that it was a valuable lifeline for many people, page 137 of the Agenda refers.

• Members further discussed the services on offer in rural areas.

• In reference to the Waste Services Delivery Model, a Member commented that the bins did not look attractive in conservation areas and requested reassurance in relation to increased rodent issues, page 139 of the Agenda refers.  In response, the Chairman confirmed that food waste recycling was a national directive that the Council did not have control over.

• A Member queried whether the food waste bins would be optional for householders, page 139 of the Agenda refers.  In response, the Chairman explained that Victoria Burgess, Assistant Director (Neighbourhoods) had confirmed that the service was obligatory for the Council and optional for residents where charges would be similar to the green waste system.

• Members further discussed the benefits of food waste recycling.

• In reference to the SO Festival, a Member queried the response to Action 105(c) and the reasons that the SO Festival was still match funded by the Council, page 140 of the Agenda refers.

At this point in the meeting, Councillor Robert Watson declared an interest stating that he was on the Board of Directors for Magna Vitae.

·      A Member supported that the SO Festival was beneficial for communities and that the Festival greatly increased community cohesion.

In response to Members’ queries, Councillor Graham Marsh, Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Leisure and Culture, and Carbon Reduction supported that the SO Festival was an excellent part of generating community cohesion and further explained to Members that Arts Council England’s engagement was influenced by ELDC’s involvement in the festival.

The Scrutiny and Policy Officer advised Members that the question in relation to SO Festival had been previously answered as part of the Action Sheet from the last Meeting, page 50 of the Agenda refers.

• A Member highlighted that a request had been made for a Scrutiny on the Destination Lincolnshire Partnership due to lack of success in the local area. 

• In closing, the Chairman reminded Members to consider submitting further suggestion forms for scrutiny topics, page 142 of the Agenda refers.

The provisional date for the next Meeting of this Committee was noted as 17th June 2025 and will be confirmed at the AGM.