Council Debates Football Club Lease on King George V Playing Fields

The local football club, Guisborough Town Football Club, wants more land. They plan to lease it from the council for 30 years. This lease is for King George V playing fields, but some residents don’t like this idea.

The council was going to decide last month but delayed the decision for more information. Residents worry about losing open space and question who owns the land.

The council claims they own the land and must act as a statutory trustee. A long lease requires a public notice, and the council received 128 objections to the plan.

Steve Morgan speaks for concerned residents, stating the space is well-loved. He says the plan impacts the community greatly, preventing local teams from using it, impacting casual play, and affecting dog walkers.

Morgan believes the town owns the fields as a charitable trust preserved in 1954. The council disagrees, claiming it’s a misunderstanding.

Morgan also said the council should consult more by using the community asset policy to examine if the deal benefits the public. The council believes that policy does not apply here.

Morgan sent a long document to the council explaining residents’ opposition. He wants the council to follow local, national rules, and the law.

King George V fields cover 27 acres, and the deal leases nine acres to four groups. The football club gets the most: 7.67 acres, while a leisure center, tennis, and bowls clubs also benefit. The public can still use the rest.

The club’s current lease is almost up, and the new lease lets them use more land. The Football Association advised this move, which could unlock more funding for them.

The club has used the ground since 1972 and pays a small rent to the council. With over 500 players of all ages, they raised funds for pitch upkeep.

The council considers if the lease hurts public space and must weigh the objections. The club could offer more sports opportunities and improve facilities.

The new lease could earn the council money, with users maintaining the pitches for payment. Keeping the area secure is at no cost to the council. The lease has a rent-free period, after which the club pays £2,500 yearly, rising to £5,000 after three years. Rent reviews happen every five years.

A letter to the council called the plan “ill-conceived” and an “outrageous” scheme. It said it involves giving away valuable land.

The letter stated the club is a for-profit company, and local teams can’t use the pitches. The letter says the council should charge rent, calling the argument about upkeep “poor,” noting grass cutting as the only real cost.

The club has faced opposition before. In 2021, they got permission for a fence which stopped damage from motorbikes and prevented litter and dog fouling.

Some locals complained to the Ombudsman, who supported the council. A review also sided with the council.

The council and club were asked for their comments.