A letter emailed today, 10th February, to a member of the community in South Cowal, by a Scottish Government official, replying on behalf of First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, to questions submitted to her by the recipient, Rhona Ferguson, has revealed a piece of apparent chicanery by Argyll and Bute Council.
It has been made clear in this letter that the Council has always had the unquestioned right to sell the Castle Toward property to SCCDC for any price it liked.
This is regardless of the official valuation by the District Valuer for Scottish Ministers, carried out in line with prescribed community buy out procedures.
It is only if a price cannot be agreed by the seller and community purchaser that the District Valuer’s valuation is the asserted price.
This does, of course, make the Council’s position quite correct. If they did not agree the price offered by the community company, then there is no agreed price and the District Valuer’s price stands.
This does underline that the stumbling block has never been the DV’s valuation but has always been the Council’s hardened resolve not to sell this property to the community company; preferring to pay close to £250k per annum of public money to let it lie vacant and in progressive decline.
It is being said that members of the council’s administration were told by senior officers only last week that they had no option but to sell at the District Valuer’s price. This can only be verified by any of those present – but someone in this twisted scenario needs to stand true and tell the truth.
Surely there has to be someone, even one, in this administration for whom the value of straight dealing matters more than the morass of local politics in Argyll and Bute? It is hard to believe that there may be no one.
Here is the verbatim text of the relevant section of the letter received today by Ms Ferguson:
‘The valuation that Argyll and Bute Council is referring to is the independent valuation carried out on behalf of Scottish Ministers as part of the Community Right to Buy provisions. I should state that while the valuation was undertaken in accordance with the legislation, it is also a ‘Red Book’ valuation. Under the terms of the legislation, the price to be paid is; firstly, by negotiation, agreed between the community body and the owner of the land; secondly, where no agreement is reached, the price to be paid is the value assessed by the appointed valuer; and lastly, where the valuation has been appealed to the Lands Tribunal for Scotland, the price shall be as determined by that appeal. The price to be paid is therefore in the first instance, a matter between Argyll and Bute Council and SCCDC. Scottish Ministers cannot intervene in this.
‘The community right to buy legislation does not allow for any reconsideration of the value undertaken under that legislation, except where that valuation was appealed to the Lands Tribunal for Scotland. The deadline for appealing the valuation has since passed.’
The Special Meeting of the Council this coming Thursday, 13th February, called to discuss and decide what will be the council’s final position on whetehr or not to accept SCCDC’s bid of £850k for the neglected property, will now have a materially different background to their considerations.
The Special Meeting was requisitioned by Dunoon Councillor Michael Breslin with support from eleven other councillors, eight of whom, with him, signed the requisition for the special meeting, to make the nine who together form the minimum 25% of the 36 strong council.
This meeting will not be especially interesting – but, given this latest example of the extent the Council Leader and senior officers seem prepared go to obstruct the community’s settled will to buy and manage Castle Toward in the interests of community sustainablity- all bets are off.
On hearing of this letter, local MSP, Michael Russell says: ‘I keep quoting this – from a Scottish Parliament briefing :
“The requirements on local government for disposing of public sector assets at less than market value are different. The disposal of local authority assets (excluding housing land) is regulated by section 74 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 (‘the 1973 Act’). This requires local authorities to sell land for the best consideration that can reasonably be obtained (‘best consideration’).
“In determining the best consideration, the local authority must obtain a valuation report from a suitably qualified valuer. The valuer should take into account the requirements of the latest edition of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Appraisal and Valuation Standards.
“However, following amendments to section 74 of the 1973 Act by section 11 of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003, regulations were brought forward that set out the circumstances in which a local authority could dispose of land for less than best consideration.
“Under the Disposal of Land by Local Authorities (Scotland) Regulations 2010 a local authority can dispose of an asset for less than best consideration where the local authority consider the disposal is reasonable and the disposal is likely to promote or improve the economic development or regeneration, health, social well-being or environmental well-being of the whole or part of the local authority area.”
‘The underlined bit is crucial. There is absolutely no doubt that the Council dispose of the asset at whatever price it wants providing it can make a case in the above terms. The Castle Toward case is crystal clear and therefore , QED. ‘
