Vale Commons Council wants golfers to pay a 'fair share'

Some background

The Council has responsibility for the care and management of the whole of the commons, from the Vale Church to Beaucette Marina. It does so under an Ordinance of 1932, which is very specific about the Council's role in permitting organised sports (including golf), by entering agreements with such bodies. While the Council does have particular responsibilities which concern the habitants, for example over the grazing of animals, it also has a wider duty to have regard to the recreational interests of all islanders.

Golf has been played on the commons since before 1890. Save for the present arrangement, there has always been an agreement directly between the Council and the players (the golfers).

The present agreement ran from 1947 for a period of 50 years, with a further extension of 20 years. That period ends in late 2016 and the rent paid for the all but exclusive use of half of the commons by the 1,500 members of the two private clubs has been just £100 per year.

Following the Occupation, the States gave what was then the large sum of £5,000 to reinstate the golf course. This sum was insufficient and so the States loaned a further £5,000 on condition that the management of the course was taken over by the States, who would run it as a municipal course, open to all suitably qualified golfers whether members of the two clubs or not. The preamble to the Resolution of the States drew attention to the royal and ancient course at St Andrew's, Scotland, as an example of the States' intention.

As everyone will know, the municipal course never happened. The only terms upon which a non-member of the two clubs can presently play is for a maximum of six times a year, on payment to the two clubs of £55 per round, and with restrictions on a Thursday, Saturday or Sunday. Your recent report quoted Mr McKeary, on behalf of the clubs, as stating that £70 per round was more appropriate.

While the States are a party to the present agreements for the playing of golf, that arrangement will end in 2016. It is also a matter of fact that the States has long since relinquished management and upkeep of the course to Golf Course Management LBG, a company wholly owned by the two clubs.

While the clubs are anxious to only take a fresh agreement from the States, neither the Council, the habitants, nor those persons who between them own some 40% of the present course, are in favour of such a move. Rather, the Council believes that any future agreement should be between itself and the two clubs; but on the clear understanding that the Council will consult closely with whichever department of the States oversees future sporting interests, to make sure that such requirements as the States may have as to the standard of the course, the playing of tournaments and access for non-members of the clubs are all properly addressed.

Quite simply, the sooner the golfers sit down with the Council's representatives and work through the options for the future playing of golf on the commons the better. The Council has set a date of 30 June 2015 as the end date for this process to be substantially completed.

While the golfers may seek States involvement, in the belief that it will better suit their interests, the Council and the habitants see the States as having far more pressing interests than those of the 1,500 or so members of two private clubs, whose aspirations must eventually and necessarily be fairly balanced with those of the rest of the island's population and the visitor economy. The Ordinance of 1932 is satisfactory for this purpose and, in our view, should be followed.

The Council's proposals

Your paper has been supplied with the full details of the two proposals that the Council has put to the golfers. Each has its roots in asking the golfers to meet one half of the £160,000 a year that the Council's vision for the whole of the commons requires. In addition, and has always been the case, the golfers will also pay a sum to the previously mentioned land owners. The rationale for seeking one half of its projected costs from the golfers is that they occupy one half of the commons, not exclusively but almost so.

The first proposal, made in December 2012 was for an arrangement similar to the present one and on payment of an annual global sum of £89,750, inflated over time. Assuming full membership between the two clubs this equates to £4.99 per member, per month. The proposal was for 25 years as the Council has had its hands tied since 1947 and future council members will need to balance the requirements of the golfers with the recreational needs of rest of the island population as it will be in 2042. This proposal was rejected as being too expensive and the duration too short. I shall leave it to your readers to judge whether the stance taken by the golfers was reasonable.

The second proposal which was put to the golfers by the Council a couple of weeks ago was arrived at by taking account of views expressed by the golfers and some habitants. At its core are two elements, the first being to propose a risk-sharing arrangement between the Council and the golfers, by which a lower global sum of £55,000 would be paid and each player would also contribute £2.50 per round.

The second element is that the course be opened up to qualified islanders and visitors who were not members of the two clubs. Of the 50,000 available rounds each year 30,000 rounds would be reserved for the club members and 20,000 rounds would be municipal.

The proposal is that municipal players would pay £27.50 per round, of which £2.50 would go to the Council, £3.44 would be ring-fenced for the Council to promote the course and £21.56 would go to the golfers, who would continue to maintain and manage the course.

So, that is what is presently on the table for discussion between the Council and the golfers. It is not set in stone but it is a response to the rejection of the original proposal. Quite where the claim that the Council will get £248,000 a year comes from is not clear but it is evident from the figures which I have quoted in this letter that the vast majority of any municipal fees goes to the golfers and not the Council. The objective being to secure a contribution of £ 80,000 a year. On a risk sharing basis that could be more but, equally, it could be less.

Finally, I turn to Rob Batiste's article.

Neither the Council, its working party, the habitants nor the land owners are 'anti-golfer', but they do want to see golfers paying a fair share of the cost of the upkeep and improvement of the commons for all.

Arguments that the golfers already spend £500,000 a year on maintaining the course and also pay their club membership fees do not come into it. The course is maintained almost exclusively for the benefit of the golfers, who also own their two private clubs.

The Environment Department, not Culture and Leisure as Rob Batiste stated, make an annual grant to the Council, towards the general upkeep of the commons by it. The States fixed this by a resolution of 2001 in the sum of £30,000 but it has not been increased by inflation for 14 years. A reasoned case has been made by the Council that the original sum now be increased by inflation, to £45,000 from 2015. This has been declined.

The Council has now provided Deputy O' Hara, the other members of his political board and all other deputies with the full details of the proposals that the Council has put to the golfers.

The members of the Commons Council and its working party are unpaid volunteers.

Any money paid by any sporting body to the Council will be applied exclusively to the maintenance, improvement and general wellbeing of the commons, for the benefit of all Islanders and will be fully accounted for.

If the Council were not to run the commons would it then be left to the States? Given that the cost to the States of its average employee is something like one and a half times the total grant which the Environment Department presently pays to the Council, I shall leave it to your readers to conclude the likely cost, were the job of maintaining and enhancing the commons to be properly done.

GEORGE DOMAILLE,

President,

Vale Commons Council.