Can’t justify half price ‘fire sale’

Regardless as to whether you are a golfer or a resident who values green-space, there is another angle to Horsham District Council’s proposal to build over 800 homes at Rookwood.

On acquiring the land in 1986, the council agreed a 50 percent ‘profit share’ with the vendors in the event of any such development.

Despite repeated freedom of information requests, official figures that would reveal the anticipated profit arising from a planning approval are still being kept secret.

However we can reasonably expect the uplift in land value to be at least £40m. This means that some £20m would need to be handed over to the original Vendors.

But, what HDC has not made clear is that this requirement to forgo 50 per cent of the ‘planning gain’ expires in 2066 i.e. 80 years after the original agreement was signed.

In other words, if the council simply retained this well used, revenue positive and much loved green-space asset until then, its financial value would automatically increase by 100 per cent overnight.

Surely that is when the future of this site should be reassessed and agreed with all stakeholders?

Disposing of it now would not only deprive the community of the beneficial usage but would effectively ‘flog it off’ at half price!

Why would HDC do that? We know that HDC holds massive general reserves of over £15m.

With this year’s loss arising from the Covid pandemic expected to be no more than £2m, it can hardly justify a ‘half price’ fire sale now of such a valued and valuable asset.

Under Section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972 councils are mandated to deal prudently with public assets and in the manner of a trustee. I have therefore written to HDC’s chief executive, Glen Chipp, to request that he determines if this proposed short-term sale, at an effective 50 per cent discount, would breach this statute.

I have suggested that for transparency there should be an independent professional financial evaluation, especially given the unusual situation of an in-built doubling of future asset value if held for the remaining 45 years (likely only 40 years anyway from development commencement).

This site is clearly a valuable long term asset held on behalf of Horsham residents.

What possible financial justification is there now for a short term fire sale which both diminishes the wellbeing of residents and only realises half its true monetary value?

Definitely not prudent, more like lose-lose! PAULKORNYCKY CoxGreen, Rudgwick