Agenda and draft minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Callum Butler, Emma Cresswell, Anne Dorrian, David Middleton and Helen Staples.

No declarations of interest were received.

The Minutes of the Full Council meeting on 29^th September 2025 were agreed and signed by the Mayor.

The Chief Executive introduced Mr Russell Stone as the Council’s newly appointed Director of Finance (S151 Officer). Members welcomed Mr Stone and noted his commitment to supporting the Council’s financial governance.

The Chief Executive confirmed that no deputations or petitions had been received.

1.  Question to Councillor Sandeep Ghosh from Councillor Jonathan Noble:

If the Government’s devolution plan for Lincolnshire goes ahead, the Southern Lincolnshire Unitary Council of which Boston will be a part, is likely to be saddled with half of the defunct Lincolnshire County Council’s £469 million debt, so what preliminary provisions has the South and East Lincolnshire Partnership made for dealing with this problem?

Response from Councillor Sandeep Ghosh:

I would like to thank Councillor Noble for his question. The level of debt will remain unchanged under Local Government Reorganisation. The financial modelling that forms part of the submission to Government will take into account a range of financial factors, including existing debt levels.

Furthermore, the formation of the two divisions has not yet been determined. Should we fall within the southern division, it will not only involve the SELCP partnership but also other councils that will participate in the discussions. We are, therefore, at a very early stage of the overall process, and it would be premature to draw conclusions or make provisions at this point.

Supplementary question from Councillor Jonathan Noble to Councillor Sandeep Ghosh:

Now we understand that the Boston Council's current level of debt is approximately £16.5 million due to our investment in various property funds. And obviously, should this southern unitary go ahead we will probably have the debts of North and South Kesteven Councils, but also our two partnership councils. So my question is, what is the current level of debt in each of our partnership Councils, that is East Lindsay District Council and South Holland District Council?

Supplementary response from Councillor Sandeep Ghosh:

I can at least tell about Boston, I don't know about the other councils. Boston have paid back everything. The State Street loan has been paid two weeks back and at the moment we don't have any debts left. Thank you.

2.  Question to Councillor Sandeep Ghosh from Councillor Jonathan Noble:

How much did Boston Borough Council pay for the former B and M Building in PE21, including demolition costs?

Response from Councillor Sandeep Ghosh:

Boston Borough Council paid £1,800,000 plus VAT (so £2,160,000 including VAT) for the land and buildings commonly referred to as ‘the former B&M site’ to enable what is now known as its Rosegarth Square project.

In terms of demolition, as the Council entered into a Minor Works Building Contract for the Rosegarth Square project, which included demolition of both the former B&M building and Crown House, it is very difficult to disaggregate a pure cost for the B&M building only; however, the final account figure for demolition works of all structures across the two sites was £380,637.60.

Supplementary question from Councillor Jonathan Noble to Councillor Sandeep Ghosh:

Now the Council has paid a very high figure for the B&M building and land, given that the property was on the market for £1.3 million for many months, if not more than a year. So the Council has paid over £500,000 more than  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

The Chief Executive confirmed that no questions had been received from members of the public.

To receive the draft Minutes from the meeting held on 13^th October 2025.

The Mayor, as Chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee, presented the draft Audit and Governance minutes from the meeting held on 13^th October 2025 for councillors to note.

It was noted that a report had been issued with a rating of insufficient control for one area where no controls were found in place. This was highlighted as an unusual situation, as such circumstances had not occurred in the last 20 years. Clarification was requested on which area this related to and whether it referred to financial controls. The Mayor advised that a response could be provided by Internal Audit officers at the next Audit & Governance Committee meeting.

Concerns were expressed that at the previous Audit & Governance Committee meeting, no Section 151 Officer, Deputy Section 151 Officer, or representative had been present. It was confirmed that the new S151 Officer would ensure appropriate attendance at future meetings.

A query was raised regarding borrowing from the Public Works Loan Board to invest in property funds. It was confirmed that the amount borrowed, approximately £16.5 million, had been repaid. Clarification was also provided regarding the difference between this borrowing and the State Street loan.

(A report by John Medler, Assistant Director – Governance & Monitoring Officer)

The Assistant Director – Governance & Monitoring Officer introduced the report, which set out a revised allocation of seats on the Council’s committees, panels, and working groups following recent changes to the political composition of the authority. Members were advised that the review had been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 and the Local Government (Committees and Political Groups) Regulations 1990.

The Assistant Director – Governance & Monitoring Officer confirmed that the revised seat allocations and associated appointments were attached at Appendix 1 of the supplementary agenda pack. The report recommended that Council approve the updated allocations for the remainder of the 2025/26 municipal year.

In addition, Council was asked to consider appointments to outside bodies where vacancies had arisen, details of which were attached at Appendix 2 of the supplementary agenda pack:

·       Black Sluice Internal Drainage Board – one vacancy was reported.

·       Witham Fourth District Internal Drainage Board – two vacancies were reported.

·       Thomas Sanderson Trust – one lay member vacancy was reported.

The following nominations were considered:

·       Councillor James Cantwell was nominated to sit on the Black Sluice Internal Drainage Board.

·       Councillor Richard Austin BME and Mr Phillip Ashton were nominated to sit on the Witham Fourth District Internal Drainage Board.

·       No nominations were received for the Thomas Sanderson Trust.

The recommendations were moved by Councillor Dale Broughton and seconded by Councillor Stephen Woodliffe.

Resolved

1.     That the revised allocation of seats and appointments to Committees, Panels and Working Groups, in Appendix 1 within the report, be approved for the remainder of the Municipal Year 2025/26;

2.     That Councillor James Cantwell be appointed to the Black Sluice Internal Drainage Board for the remainder of the 2025/26 Municipal Year; and

3.     That Councillor Richard Austin and Mr Phillip Ashton be appointed to the Witham Fourth District Internal Drainage Board for the remainder of the 2025/26 Municipal Year.

(A report by James Gilbert, Assistant Director – Corporate)

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Dale Broughton, introduced the report which sought approval of the revised Pensions and Pension Discretions Policy. The report explained that under the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) Regulations, the Council is required to publish a policy statement detailing how it would exercise its discretionary powers in relation to pension matters. A copy of the Pensions & Pension Discretions Policy was attached as Appendix A within the report.

The proposed policy had been developed by Public Sector Partnership Services (PSPS) and reviewed through a comprehensive process, including consultation with trade union representatives, the Readers’ Panel, and consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 8^th October 2025.

The policy set out the Council’s approach to mandatory and non-mandatory discretions under the LGPS, ensuring compliance with statutory requirements and promoting consistency, transparency, and fairness in decision-making. It also supported effective workforce planning and succession management by providing clear guidance for managers and employees.

The report highlighted that approval of the policy would:

·       Ensure harmonisation of pension arrangements across the South and East Lincolnshire Councils Partnership;

·       Strengthen governance and safeguard regulatory compliance; and

·       Provide a fair and equitable framework for pension-related decisions.

Members welcomed the clarity provided by the revised policy and noted its importance in maintaining compliance with LGPS regulations. It was acknowledged that the policy would assist in managing workforce changes and retirement planning, while ensuring that decisions were made consistently across the partnership.

Members also noted that the policy had been subject to thorough review and scrutiny, and that no significant changes had been proposed beyond those required to reflect current legislation and best practice.

The recommendations were moved by Councillor Dale Broughton and seconded by Councillor Stephen Woodliffe.

Resolved

That the HR policy (Pensions & Pensions Discretion Policy) be approved.

[The Head of HR & OD and the Group Manager - Organisational Development left the meeting at 7.07pm, following consideration of the above item.]

(A report by Christian Allen, Assistant Director – Regulatory)

The Portfolio Holder for Infrastructure, Councillor Chris Mountain, introduced the report which sought approval of the revised Statement of Licensing Policy in accordance with Section 5 of the Licensing Act 2003. The Licensing Authority was required to review, adopt and publish its Statement of Licensing Policy every five years. The current policy was due for review by January 2026, and failure to adopt a revised policy by that date would leave the authority open to legal challenge in respect of licensing decisions.

The report outlined the statutory framework and confirmed that the policy set out the approach the Licensing Authority would take to promote the four licensing objectives:

·       Prevention of crime and disorder

·       Public safety

·       Prevention of public nuisance

·       Protection of children from harm

The Licensing Committee considered a draft revised policy on 10^th June 2025 and resolved that consultation should be undertaken in accordance with the Act. Public consultation took place between 23^rd June and 17^th August 2025. One response had been received from Lincolnshire Police which was reviewed by the Licensing Committee on 23^rd September 2025, and amendments were made where appropriate. A copy of the report detailed consultation responses was attached as Appendix 1 within the report. The final draft policy, incorporating the changes for adoption by Full Council, was attached as Appendix 2 within the report.

Members expressed disappointment at the limited number of responses received during the consultation period. Despite this, Members acknowledged that the responses received had been considered and incorporated into the final draft. The importance of the policy in balancing the needs of local businesses with the protection of public health and safety was emphasised. Members commended the Licensing Team for producing a comprehensive and clear policy that reflects statutory requirements and local priorities.

The recommendations were moved by Councillor Chris Mountain and seconded by Councillor Stuart Evans.

Resolved

That the Statement of Licensing Policy be approved, following which it will be published by the statutory deadline.

To change the membership of the community governance review working group

The Council notes the important rote ot the community governance review working group in shaping the future of local governance arrangements within the Borough.

In the interests of ensuring broader representation and participation the council resolves to;

A.)lncrease the number of members on the community governance review working group from 5 to 7 elected members and

B.) Appoint the following members to the community governance review working group

Mike Gilbert

Paul Gleeson

Barrie Pierpoint

Anton Dani

Suzanne Welberry

Stephen Woodliffe

Andy Izard

Proposer: Suzanne Welberry

Seconder: Andy Izard

The following Motion was received:

Community Governance Review Working Group Membership

To change the membership of the community governance review working group.

The Council notes the important role of the community governance review working group in shaping the future of local governance arrangements within the Borough.

In the interests of ensuring broader representation and participation the council resolves to;

A)    lncrease the number of members on the community governance review working group from 5 to 7 elected members and

B)    Appoint the following members to the community governance review working group:

Mike Gilbert

Paul Gleeson

Barrie Pierpoint

Anton Dani

Suzanne Welberry

Stephen Woodliffe

Andy Izard

The motion was moved by Councillor Suzanne Welberry and seconded by Councillor Andy Izard.

Members emphasised the importance of accelerating progress on the Community Governance Review to avoid delays that could impact the transfer of assets and the creation of a town council. It was noted that scheduled meetings of the working group had been cancelled, which had caused concern about the pace of work and the risk of losing momentum on such a significant project.

The debate highlighted the need for strong local representation to ensure that Boston’s interests were prioritised during any transition to a unitary authority. The increase in membership from five to seven had been proposed to ensure broader representation and accelerate progress on the review. Members stressed that without a proactive approach, there was a danger that local decision-making could be diluted and that Boston’s voice might not be adequately heard in future governance arrangements.

There was also a clear focus on the importance of protecting heritage and financial assets and ensuring they remained under local control. Members agreed that those assets represented a vital part of Boston’s identity and economic stability, and that robust arrangements should be in place to safeguard them before any structural changes occurred.

In addition, the requirement for timely consultation with parishes and stakeholders was underlined as essential to maintaining transparency and community engagement. Members recognised that effective communication would help build trust and ensure that local residents and organisations had the opportunity to contribute to shaping the governance model.

Finally, there was a strong commitment to collaborative working within the expanded group to deliver outcomes efficiently and effectively. Members agreed that the proposed appointments brought experience and dedication to the task, and that the enlarged membership would help ensure that the review progressed without further delay.

Resolved

That the membership of the Community Governance Review Working Group be increased from 5 to 7 elected members and that Councillors Mike Gilbert, Paul Gleeson, Barrie Pierpoint, Anton Dani, Suzanne Welberry, Stephen Woodliffe and Andy Izard be appointed to the Working Group.