Agenda item

Gill Wilson, Growth Strategy and Funding:

a)    provided the Board with a report on the UKSPF Programme. During consideration of the update, the following points were noted: -

·       The City of Lincoln Council (CoLC) was allocated £2,810,773 UKSPF funding as part of the Government’s levelling up agenda for expenditure April 2022 to March 2025

·       The basis of the award was an Investment Plan, submitted in 2022 which set out how funds would be indicatively spent across the 3 pillars of the fund, Community and Place, People and Skills and Supporting Local Businesses

·       Phase 2 projects, as reported to Board in March 2024, were approved subject to delivery plan sign off, at CoLC’s Executive Committee on 18 March 2024

·       The final project programme and project updates under each of the UKSPF pillars could be seen at Appendix A of the report

·       The scope of the programme was ambitious and aimed to respond to local area needs and gaps identified in provision, particularly in Ermine and Moorland Wards

·       The focus of considerable investment had been on Community Hubs

·       The programme was largely formed of revenue costs however there was a capital element condition to be spent by March 2025

·       The Community Bakery was the only project not currently in delivery. If it was not possible to gain assurances, the funding would be spent elsewhere across the scheme.

b)    welcomed comments and questions from Members of the Board.

Question: Would ‘lobbying’ benefit Lincoln?

Response: A response to lobbying was awaited. Expenditure would be achieved by March 2025 and it was better to do it over a longer time frame as it would be richer and better value.

Comment: It was important to identify the need and to work with the community.

Comment: Lincoln was part of ‘Key Cities’, a group outside of the 8/9 core cities in the county. As a collective, they had written to the Ministry.

Question: Was the MP able to help with the lobbying?

Response: Yes.

Comment: The Community Bakery had experienced a setback at Belmont Street. There was a plan in place at the time, but it did not happen. There was now a new plan however time was running out.

Response: The issue was investing in a longer-term solution as it required a longer lease. Any other building required ongoing revenue funding which had not been secured.

Question: Was the risk in revenue or capital? Required confirmation that there was a £250K capital element with the bakery.

Response: The bakery had a total capital element of £130K. Figures would be amended to reflect the correct capital element and recirculated to Board members.

Comment: When the programme was initially considered, there was a positive map of need. Was there a way of overlaying the projects on a map to demonstrate how it had been targeted?

Response: Yes. Some projects such as Age UK were countywide and future work would demonstrate both where the projects were located and the projects activity also.

RESOLVED that:

1)    The Secretariate be tasked with the amendment of the capital figures in relation to the Community Bakery and subsequent recirculation to members of the Board.

2)    The content of the report be noted with thanks.

(Note: Nicole Hilton joined proceeding remotely at this stage)