Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Rickett, Davie, Williams, Eyre, Arnold, Cullen, Smith, Danny Brookes, Billy Brookes, Jimmy Brookes, Burnham, Jones, Grist, Harrison, Grover, Edginton and Knowles.

At this point in the Meeting, Members were invited to declare any relevant interests.  Declarations were made as follows:

·       Councillors Adrian Benjamin and Tony Howard asked it be noted that they were Members of the Connected Coast Board, Minute No. 53 refers.

To confirm the Open and Exempt Minutes of the Meeting held on 12 October 2022.

The Open and Exempt Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 12 October 2022 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

To confirm Actions following the Meeting held on 12 October 2022.

The Actions were noted as complete.

The Chairman had attended several events since the previous Council meeting, including Civic Services for the Chairman of South Holland District Council and the Chairman of Lincolnshire County Council.  She also attended the Royal British Legion Services of Remembrance at Mablethorpe, Sutton on Sea and the RNLI.

The Chairman advised Members that the Reserved Member Day on Friday 16 December 2022 had been cancelled.  The next RMD would take place remotely on Tuesday 17 January 2023 at 10am and the confirmed agenda items were as follows:

•          Primary Care Trusts

•          The Partnership Enviro-Crime Enforcement Contract

Finally, the Chairman extended her best wishes to all for a Happy Christmas and peaceful New Year.

To answer questions pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 10.

There were no questions from the public.

Ahead of presenting his report, the Leader of the Council reflected that the meeting would be the last one held in Tedder Hall ahead of the move to the purpose-built Hub in Horncastle and highlighted that many important and notable moments had been shared in the Council Chambers.

The Chairman of Executive Board presented his report as circulated in the Supplementary Agenda, pages 1 to 6 refer.

Councillor Jackson expressed her disappointment that further to the Invest to Save projects initiative detailed at the previous meeting, there had been no further information on these projects, Council Minute No. 32 refers. 

In response, the Chairman of Executive Board advised Members that the Invest to Save projects initiative was still live and was therefore work in progress.

Green Homes Grants

Councillor Howard was pleased to note the positive points in the report, however highlighted that the Council needed to prioritise and promote to move away from what was standard building practices at the moment in relation to carbon burning and refurbishment of old properties. 

In response, the Chairman of Executive Board stated that he understood the challenges of housing, particularly as there was a very large stock of old housing across the district and acknowledged that new housing must be built to the best standard possible, however highlighted that the decision-making process relating to housing standards was not a matter for the Council.

In response to Councillor Cunnington’s comments about the late receipt of reports, the Chairman of Executive Board apologised to Members for the lateness of his report and assured Members that he would do better in future.

Enviro-crime Enforcement Contract

Further to the information provided, Councillor Mossop raised his concern that communities were not receiving feedback from reported enforcement cases and emphasised that communication was very important to encourage other people to work with them.

In response, the Chairman of Executive Board advised Members that the principle of the Enviro-crime Enforcement Contract roll-out would be to engage, educate and enforce and assured Members that this would be adhered to.

Cost of Living Support

Councillor Makinson-Sanders asked that her thanks be conveyed from the people in Louth for the warm spaces provided in the town. 

In response to Councillor Howard’s comment with regards to food banks and warm spaces being an indication of a failure of society, the Chairman of Executive Board responded that there were many outside factors that made it very difficult, including the cost of living crisis and praised the work of housing officers and those that dealt with the public going through difficulties on a daily basis.

Emergency Accommodation for Asylum Seekers

Several comments were received from Members that raised concerns, including asylum seekers arriving in Britain who were only allowed to work after they had been waiting for a decision after one year.  It was highlighted that this was out of step with other developed nations and considered that the Council should be campaigning against this so that the 12 months wait should be reduced in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

To consider a Scrutiny Report.

Councillor Edward Mossop, Chairman of the Joint Scrutiny of the South & East Lincolnshire Councils Partnership Scrutiny Panel presented the report to Council for noting.

Cllr Mossop referred to the Peer Review undertaken with Boston Borough Council that had further extended to South Holland District Council when the Partnership was formed.  Councillor Mossop expressed his disappointment that the Peer review had not been published at that time the scrutiny was underway as there were similar themes running through in many ways to the recommendations that came from the recent publication of the Partnership Peer Review.

Councillor Mossop provided Members with a detailed overview of the report and its associated appendices, pages 9 to 40 of the Agenda refer.  The recommendations to the report were detailed at pages 11 to 12 of the Agenda pack.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

• A Member highlighted that following the formation of the Partnership in October 2021, there was still a difference in pay and conditions between the three sovereign councils and also that of Members’ allowances, following which it was queried why the scrutiny panel had made no recommendations to make this fair and equal.

The Monitoring Officer confirmed that Councillors’ Allowances were set after review by the Independent Remuneration Panel for each individual council.

• Councillor Makinson-Sanders stated that she attended the Peer Review Feedback Session held at Boston Borough Council and one of the findings of the Peer Support Group was that PSPS Limited played a major part in what the Partnership was trying to achieve and would have liked to see them included in the review.  Following which it was considered that recommendation No. 7 should be followed up at an early stage.

Councillor Craig Leyland, as Portfolio Holder for Corporate Affairs, expressed his thanks to Councillor Mossop and the Panel and welcomed this very thorough report.  Members were advised that he would discuss with colleagues across the portfolio areas prior to a response to Overview Committee.

To consider an appointment.

The Chief Executive presented a report that considered the appointment of a reserve member to the Health Scrutiny Committee for Lincolnshire for the remainder of the 2022/23 Municipal Year.  Members were asked to note that any nominations must also be an appointed member of the Council’s Overview Committee.

It was Proposed and Seconded that Councillor David Mangion be appointed as reserve member to the Health Scrutiny Committee.

It was Proposed and Seconded that Councillor Claire Arnold be appointed as reserve member to the Health Scrutiny Committee.

It was Proposed and Seconded that Councillor Jill Makinson-Sanders be appointed as reserve member to the Health Scrutiny Committee.

Following a show of hands for each nomination, it was carried that Councillor David Mangion be appointed as reserve member to the Health Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED:

That Councillor David Mangion be appointed as reserve member to the Health Scrutiny Committee for Lincolnshire for the remainder of the Municipal Year 2022/23.

To consider a request for Additional Capital Funding for Mablethorpe and Skegness Towns Funds Submissions.

The Chairman of Executive Board presented a report that enabled consideration of committing a further maximum amount of £3.5m to the six Towns Fund projects managed by the Council.

The background to the report was highlighted to Members, as set out at Paragraph 1, pages 42 to 43 of the Agenda refer.

It was noted that following the successful approval of the Towns Investment Plans, the Government offered a Town Deal to the value of £23.9m for Mablethorpe and £24.5m for Skegness to fund 13 different schemes.  Six of these projects were managed by the Council with capital cost of £35m.  Now that the cost submissions had been received and reviewed with the Council’s respective contractors, there was a requirement to commit a further maximum amount of £3.5m to these projects from the Council’s reserves.  This represented an uplift of around 10% and was largely due to inflationary pressures.

The funds would be set aside on a contingency basis and would be funded from the Growth Reserve and/or the returned Property Fund Debt.

Following which the recommendations were duly Proposed and Seconded.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

• A Member voiced concerns that the government was not providing further funding to bridge inflationary cost pressures.  It was however acknowledged that the Towns Fund projects were massively important and significant to the business economy and the way the Council operated with the potential for generating income in the future.

Following which, Councillor Jackson proposed that an amendment be made to put forward to government that it would increase its contribution by 10% to account for inflation.  The form of working was confirmed as follows:

‘ELDC will ask the government to increase their contribution to Skegness and Mablethorpe towns fund by 10% to account for inflation’.

Councillor Howard, Leader of the Labour Group seconded the proposal.

The Leader of the Labour Group requested that the Leader of the Council engaged with the Chair of the Connected Coast Board to set negotiation into operation as soon as possible to ensure that the Council was in a position to deliver these projects as they were very worthy and hopefully in years to come would be seen as a pivotable moment for the coastal area.

In response, the Leader of the Council agreed that the inflationary pressures were unfair and a challenge to the Council.  However, it was important to note that the Council had received £50m direct funding from the government to invest in coastal communities and also significant amounts of approximately £40m brought in from various partners in terms of direct match funding.

Members were further advised that on the back of discussion of the Partnership, since the levelling up funding had been announced and the work around levelling up bids the Council was waiting for the outcome and clarity on the following:

• Two levelling up bids for £8.1m.  The Council had received UK Shared Prosperity Funding for £4.1m.

• It was awaiting the outcome for a Rural Prosperity bid  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

To seek Full Council approval to enter into a Section 30 Agreement with the Environment Agency in relation to the title deed of land impacted by the redevelopment of the Colonnade project site in Sutton on Sea.

The Portfolio Holder for Coastal Economy presented a report that sought Full Council approval to enter into a Section 30 Agreement with the Environment Agency in relation to the title deed of land impacted by the redevelopment of the Colonnade project site in Sutton on Sea.

The final copy of the Agreement (attached at Appendix A) followed a lengthy and detailed process of negotiation with the Environment Agency which had also informed additional amendments to the final site layout.  The recommendations had been considered and endorsed by the Council’s Executive Board (Executive Board Minute No. 50 refers) to proceed to Full Council for formal agreement and resolution.

It was noted that the Agreement placed a future financial liability on the Council to contribute up to a maximum of £750,000 over a fifty-year period towards future sea defence enhancement works where the Council’s new investment into the Colonnade facilities could be proven by the EA to have directly resulted in an uplift in costs for the Agency to improve the adjacent sea defence structures.

The recommendations were duly proposed and seconded.

RESOLVED

That the Chief Executive, S151 Officer or Deputy Chief Executive (Programme Delivery) be authorised to enter into the Section 30 Agreement on behalf of the Council with the Environment Agency, as provided at Appendix A.

To note the findings of the LGA Peer Review and associated Action Plan.

The Chairman of Executive Board presented a report to note the findings of the LGA Peer Review that was undertaken in October 2022.  It was noted that a report had been provided which detailed the findings and an Action Plan had been developed in response to the recommendations.

The Chairman of Executive Board added that the Peer Review had provided the Council with an independent external assessment of the Partnership and that it tied in well with the Joint Scrutiny of the South & East Lincolnshire Councils Partnership that was presented at Item 8(a) and was pleased to see that the recommendations mirrored the Scrutiny Panel report.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

A Member highlighted the first key recommendation referred to developing and communicating widely a collective understanding of the Partnership’s purpose, future direction and timescales for delivery, Paragraph 2.1, page 82 of the Agenda refers and further to that the second recommendation at Paragraph 2.3 in relation to defining long term strategic place shaping ambitions across the Partnership and queried whether it was appropriate to committing to one shared set of priorities.

It was highlighted that it was important to ensure that the place shaping came from the bottom up and was concerned that as the strategy was influenced from the top down how local communities would recognise their identity within the Partnership and how their voices would be heard to form that strategic view going forward.

In response, the Leader of the Council understood the Member’s concerns and stressed that communication was key and added that it wasn’t entirely about place.  In discussion with Executive Board colleagues, a common theme coming forward was how those benefits were brought to the district’s residents and communities.  An example was provided of funding received for Green Homes Grants that had been collectively applied for, and it was highlighted that information needed to be drawn down quickly for the Council to be able to say that because of the Partnership, the Council had been able to achieve this for its residents. 

RESOLVED

That the LGA Peer Review Report and Action Plan be noted.

To receive and review the Mid Term Treasury Report 2022-2023.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance presented the Mid Term Treasury Management Report 2022/23.

Members were referred to the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy detailed at Appendix A, pages 113 to 132 of the Agenda refer.

In introducing the report, the Portfolio Holder for Finance referred to the Council’s Investment Policy and Strategy.  It was noted that the Council had a higher level of surplus funds available for investment following the receipt of New Towns Funding and that there were less counterparties currently available to the Council.  As a result, it was becoming increasingly difficult to invest short-term funds for longer durations at higher rates.

The recommendations were duly proposed and seconded

Member were asked to consider the recommendation that the Sovereign Country Limit be increased from £5m to £10m (excluding the UK which had no limit).  The bank group or individual limit would remain at £5m.

This recommendation was considered at Audit and Governance Committee on 23 November 2022, Minute No. 33 refers and agreed that it be recommended to Council that the Sovereign Investment Limit be increased from £5 to £10m, however the Committee decision was not unanimous.

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

Councillor Jackson, a Member of the Audit and Governance Committee highlighted that one of the discussions at Committee was centred around risk and she considered that an increase from £5m to £10m was a potential large risk and was concerned as the policy did not take into consideration countries of different sizes when making an investment.  Current factors such as the crypto currency crisis and crash, the energy crisis related to the war in Ukraine and the property market in China were further highlighted and together with ongoing huge financial volatility this was a further concern and potential risk.

Councillor Jackson further highlighted the ecological, social and governance factors (ESG) that were not incorporated within treasury management procedures relating to investment.  Furthermore, it was considered that ESG factors should be given weight in the Council’s treasury investment decisions.

Following which, Councillor Jackson proposed that two amendments be made to and included within the treasury management strategy as follows:

• That whilst the Council increased the sovereign country rate to £10m, countries with a population of below 3 million should remain at a sovereign country limit of £5m.

• That ESG factors should be given weight in the Council’s treasury investment decisions.

The proposals were seconded by Councillor Tony Howard.

In response to Councillor Jackson’s proposals, the Leader of the Council considered that the matter relating to the sovereign country limits was a matter for the Audit and Governance Committee and asked that clarity be provided on this matter.

The Chief Executive confirmed that the responsibility for this report rested with Full Council so it was for Council Members to decide on the content.

The Leader of the Council stated that he could not support the amendment given the nature of the banking markets and how countries were involved, irrelevant  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

To consider a report to introduce a new updated version of the Contract Procedure Rules and an amendment to the Financial Procedure Rules.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance presented a report to consider the introduction of a new updated version of the Contract Procedure Rules and an amendment to the Financial Procedure Rules.

The purpose of this report was to present to the Council a revised draft set of Contract Procedure Rules with appropriate delegations that provided additional clarity around the procedures to be followed and reflected the Council’s management structure.  There was also a recommended change to the Financial Procedure Rules which would allow alignment with the new finance system used across all 3 councils when authorising payments.

The suggested amendments, set out in this report, were considered by the Audit and Governance Committee on 23rd November 2022, and were recommended to the next available full Council for approval.

As a Member of the Audit and Governance Committee, Councillor Makinson-Sanders highlighted that the Committee had been concerned with the Council’s procurement procedures for a long time and very much welcomed the report.

The recommendations were duly proposed and seconded.

RESOLVED

1. That the revised Contract Procedure Rules at Appendix 1 to this report, be adopted by Council without amendment, as the Contract Procedure Rules (CPR);
2. That the Monitoring Officer be authorised to make the necessary changes to update the Council’s Constitution accordingly, including delegation to amend where inconsistencies arise, noting that the CPR will take primacy be agreed by Council;
3. That the revised financial procedure rule for Banking arrangement and cheques as detailed in Paragraph 1.12 of the report be approved by Council.

To receive the draft Minutes of the Audit and Governance Committee held on 23^rd November 2022.

Members received the draft Open and Exempt Minutes of the Audit and Governance Committee held on 23 November 2022 for noting. 

No comments were received.

RESOLVED

That the draft Open and Exempt Minutes of the Audit and Governance Committee held on 23 November 2022 be noted.

To receive Motions on Notice under Council Procedure Rule 12.

Following the annual publication of the Heritage at Risk Register for the East Midlands when over half the Lincolnshire additions were buildings in this district, and in particular Louth Town Centre, we ask that an independent consultation is carried out into the efficacy of present planning, historic environment and enforcement systems in place at this council to enable a time line to be put forward for remedial action and funding identified to ameliorate this worrying situation.

Proposed by Councillor Jill Makinson-Sanders

Seconded by Councillor Edward Mossop

The following Motion was received in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12:

‘Following the annual publication of the Heritage at Risk Register for the East Midlands when over half the Lincolnshire additions were buildings in this district, and in particular Louth Town Centre, we ask that an independent consultation is carried out into the efficacy of present planning, historic environment and enforcement systems in place at this council to enable a timeline to be put forward for remedial action and funding identified to ameliorate this worrying situation’.

Proposed by Councillor Jill Makinson-Sanders.

Seconded by Councillor Edward Mossop.

In her introduction, Councillor Makinson-Sanders referred to the publication of the latest Historic England Buildings at Risk Register. 

Reference was made to concerns from both her and Councillor Mossop due to the following factors:

• Within its borders, East Lindsey had more than half of its sites listed on the risk register.

• The challenge to put a positive plan together to address this growing problem.

• Consideration needed to be given to how current processes could be examined for officers and Members so this area of work could be more effective for the future.

In support of the Motion, Councillor Mossop pointed out that Members had a responsibility to highlight areas of concern within conservation areas.

In response, Councillor Ashton, Portfolio Holder for Planning stated that he was unable to support the Motion but highlighted the importance of the preservation of historic buildings.

Further to Councillor Mossop’s comment, the Portfolio Holder for Planning explained that over half of the additions on the risk register were due to the Council asking for them to be registered as a proactive measure and the inclusion on the register was to monitor the sites to prevent further loss.  In addition, this also opened up additional funding streams.

In response to the request within the Motion of employing an experienced historic consultant, the Portfolio Holder for Planning advised Members of the very high cost involved and could potentially duplicate.  The Council employed its own Heritage Manager and it was evident that work undertaken in Louth, for example where Section 215 notices had been issued had resulted in massive improvement for some areas.  It was further highlighted that the Council took strong proactive action wherever possible for prosecutions for non-compliance.  Councillor Makinson-Sanders responded that she would hold the Portfolio Holder for Planning to account on this matter and would be pleased to have a discussion with him outside of the meeting in relation to buildings in Louth Town Centre.

Members were further advised that the Heritage Manager had surveyed 1000 listed buildings across East Lindsey, including those that were hard to access.  Further work was also being undertaken on bringing forward an East Lindsey Risk Register to pick up Grade 2 listed buildings.

The Portfolio Holder for Planning advised Members that it was his intention to put forward an amendment, however on reflection this would have negated the motion.

The Portfolio Holder for Planning highlighted the option to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

To answer questions pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 11.

A full list of the questions is attached as Appendix 1.

The programmed date for the next Meeting of the Council is 1 March 2023.

The programmed date for the next Meeting of the Council was noted as 1 March 2023 commencing at 2.00pm.