Clackmannanshire Council rejects golf club's bid to waive conditions of 45-year-old loan

Clackmannanshire Council has thrown out a bid by a Wee County golf club to waive conditions relating to a loan they agreed back in 1980.

Braehead Golf Club had asked the local authority to forgo the conditions of the historic loan to permit the sale of a parcel of land in order to fund investment in the course.

One councillor slammed their “audacity” and added that the council was “not in the business of just giving out money”.

Currently, the club would have to repay the loan of around £35,000 if the land is sold within 50 years of the original agreement, and, if after this period, the council would be due 30% of any proceeds.

The request for a “handout” was rejected by councillors who responded by suggesting the club was looking for an early Christmas gift.

A report had explained: “Braehead Golf Club who has a long-standing minute of agreement in relation to a historic loan received by Clackmannan District Council in 1980.

“The club have approached the council to seek permission to sell a small pocket of the course to generate monies for further reinvestment into the course maintenance infrastructure.

“The club would receive a capital receipt for such parcel and seeks to utilise this to invest back within the club. At this time, it is unknown to the council the value or intended sale price of this parcel of land.

“The minute of agreement does not permit the club to sell any of the land without council consent for a period of 50 years, without needing to repay the loan. Beyond this period, the council would be entitled to 30 per cent of the net proceeds from any sale.

“The club, in their request, asks the council to forgo these penalties and waive such entitlements.

“The club assert that such income generation is greatly needed to support their future viability, as the current course maintenance approach, which is highly dependent on volunteers and manual application, is not sustainable.”

Independent councillor Craig Holden was against any move to allow the waiving of conditions.

“The argument is we just want to keep it. It is Christmas. I suppose it is the time of year for it,” he said.

“The audacity to come to us to say we are not happy to pay the loan, but we want to keep the money so we can invest it.

“The message should say loud and clear that it is not acceptable. We are not in the business of just giving out money.

“I know it may be complex reasons, but it is incumbent on us as stewards of the taxpayers’ money to make sure we don’t just agree to this.

“I am all for support and all for golf clubs, but not in the business of giving people tens of thousands of pounds just because they don’t want the agreement.

“We are not here to act in the interests of the golf club. We are here for the interests of the council and the taxpayers.”

Cllr Donald Balsillie commented: “I am of the view that it is approaching Christmas time. I think the golf club is approaching us for effectively a gift.

“I think we should stick to our principles and reject the offer and give up the council benefits from the previous agreement.”

Councillor Graham Lindsay said: “I hope the club can understand we are, on a daily basis, looking through budgets.

“There is no way we could potentially agree to this and not have public outrage.”

Cllr Jane McTaggart added: “I think everybody agrees that it is right and proper that we should not be spending public money in this way and waiving the right to that going back in the public purse.

“It is crucial we protect that public money. It belongs to the public and the people of Clackmannanshire.”

Cllr Bryan Quinn was also against the request.

“I don’t think there is a council in the country that would agree to this,” he said. “It is asking for a handout essentially.

“We are struggling for vital services here. We need to look after the pennies.”

Council leader Ellen Forson said they had a responsibility to make decisions wisely.

“I don’t know what the council was like back in the 1980s, but we would not come to a decision where we were using public money in that way without interest being paid, without a repayment schedule and more concrete plans,” she said.

“So we are operating in very, very different circumstances. We are much more open and transparent.

“I am not sure any member of the public would applaud us for waiving the right for at least the repayment of the loan. We are the stewards of the public purse, and we are held to account for it, so we are making the right decision today.”