500% pitch fee hike decision is backed by council
A CONTROVERSIAL decision to hike fees for outdoor sports facilities by up to 500% in a South Wales county has been backed by ruling councillors.
Bridgend County Council’s cabinet was forced to look again at the move when opponents said more details were needed. But it was approved at a special cabinet meeting on Wednesday.
Councillors said it was not their intention that any club should pay the huge rise in fees for pitches and pavilions, but they wanted them to take on community asset transfers (CAT) for the facilities.
There are 293 sports teams in the county, associated with 60 football, rugby, cricket and bowls clubs.
The council’s CAT officer Guy Smith said while just one sports asset had been transferred to a club so far – Bryncethin RFC – eight were close to being signed over, with another 18 under way.
He said there had also been a further 20 informal expressions of interest, leaving just one asset – the facilities used by Blaengarw Cricket Club – that the council had not had any discussions over.
Plaid group leader Tim Thomas, who called the decision in for further scrutiny, said there had been concerns over the complex and time-consuming CAT process, the lack of clarity over exactly how the proposed charges had been arrived at and a lack of detail over a new fund being set up to help support children in sport.
He told cabinet members during the meeting that everything had to be done to ensure clubs did not have to pay the proposed charges, adding: “It’s quite clear they will be the death of many clubs.”
Cabinet members questioned whether councillors on the scrutiny committee were aware of the new “streamlined” CAT process, which, in the last few months, has become “much more flexible”.
Head of operations Zak Shell said the council could look into getting more precise figures on exactly how much each club currently pays and would be expected to pay when the new policy comes into force in September 2020.
He said the council’s published guideline figures were there to illustrate how much clubs could have to pay but costs would vary depending on the facilities and their usage.
Explaining the new fund, chief executive Mark Shephard said it would be an annual fund of about £75,000 and a full report providing more detail would soon be prepared to go before a future cabinet meeting.
He said: “We see it as a fund to help mini, junior and youth teams, recognising some clubs may require additional support. It is regarded as a transitional fund - and could be used for kit or travel, for example.”
He said other groups could also be supported.
Mr Shell said the council’s approach was based on having to save £438,000 from its budget for outdoor sports facilities.
Council leader Huw David said there had been no alternative proposal suggested to find the cuts elsewhere, adding the local authority was faced with making a further £35m cuts in the next four years, leading to hundreds of job losses.
Meanwhile, cabinet member for education and regeneration Charles Smith pointed out the council’s proven track record in asset transfers, saying he hoped clubs would see it as an opportunity rather than a threat.
He acknowledged the process could be frightening and complex but the council could help organisations through it.
Cabinet member for communities Richard Young said asset transfers would give clubs greater autonomy and freedom.
He said: “I’m committed to make sure that clubs don’t pay any of these charges.
“I’m encouraged by the fact the majority of assets are under discussion.”
Mr Shell said the council was not looking to implement the charges but was looking to implement a stimulus to ensure CATs actually happened.
Councillors said the fees hike would only affect those clubs who are not engaged with the asset transfer process.
Newbridge Fields is to have a separate strategy due to the number of clubs which use its facilities.
Mr Smith said they could be transferred to a town and community council or a sports association, with other places like Maesteg Welfare Park being considered for a similar approach.
He said he was keen to talk to more town and community councils to see if they would be willing to take on facilities.
Mr Shephard spoke of a £1m fund to support CATs in the county, adding it would be replenished once gone.
He said: “This is about a long-term sustainable solution – it’s in no-one’s interest that it fails.”
Speaking after the meeting, Richard Edwards from Bridgend Town Juniors criticised the communication from the council, saying it had been terrible and the local authority should have worked out exact figures for each club first before publishing the proposed figures.
He said: “If you spoke to anyone in any organisation and tell them that it costs £300 per game to provide the pitch and the pavilion, they would fall over laughing.
“The council is saying they’ve subsidised the cost of running facilities by up to 80% but they haven’t – they haven’t been subsidising them because they haven’t maintained facilities for 30 years.
“I’m 50 and have been playing in Bridgend since I was 20, there’s been no investment in facilities over that time. I can’t think of one facility that clubs use that would pass health and safety, how can they quote £300 a game – it’s nonsense.
“The good news for us is that fees are going to be frozen until they work out what to do with Newbridge Fields.”