Acre of land for halting site nuisance compo splits council

CORK County Council has been warned it faces a potential bill of hundreds of thousands of euro if more landowners adjoining an unauthorised halting site pursue a case against it in the High Court.

The warning came yesterday, as councillors in north Cork were asked to formally agree the handover of an acre of land as compensation for the nuisance caused to a landowner adjoining the halting site at Coolenanave, Mitchelstown.

Councillor Frank O’Flynn, who voted against the transfer, said five other landowners in the area would probably seek compensation following the settlement, because it had created a precedent.

Liam and Martina Finn, who are also adjoining landowners, were at the meeting in Mallow yesterday and said afterwards they would be seeking legal advice on the matter.

“The council have left themselves open to be taken on. I definitely think other landowners will be looking at it,” said Mr Finn.

The couple also criticised the council for spending €9,000 a week of taxpayers’ money for private security at the site since October 19 last.

As part of the settlement agreed with the landowner who took the council to the High Court, the local authority was obliged to ensure no more Travellers entered the site and that it would be closed as soon as possible.

Security was withdrawn last Thursday and the council is taking court action itself to remove seven Travellers from the site.

The council moved them there in the first place because they were encamped in the path of the €26m Mitchelstown relief road. Several councillors expressed their disapproval at the saga.

Mr O’Flynn said no land should be parted with and instead it should be sold through public tender.

“Why is it just one crowd was compensated... I don’t think it’s fair just to compensate one landowner,” said Councillor Kevin O’Keeffe.

Councillor Liam O’Doherty and other councillors asked if any money was also changing hands as part of a compensation package and what was the value of the land being handed over.

Assistant county manager Tim Lucey declined to answer.

All he would say was that the council faced a High Court decision and it was forced to abide by it.

He added that if councillors stood in the way they could find themselves before the High Court. This caused Mr O’Doherty to comment: “I’ll have to put the farm in the wife’s name then.”

Mr Lucey said that if the Travellers occupying the site did not move on they would also find themselves in trouble with that court.

Mr O’Flynn and Mr O’Keeffe reiterated they would vote against handing over the land.

“There’s half a dozen adjoining landowners. Can these other parties go into the High Court now?” Mr O’Keeffe asked.

Mr Lucey replied it was a matter for them.

In the end the vote to give the landowner the one acre as compensation for the nuisance caused was passed by six to five.

That, though, may not be the end of the matter. It will have to be ratified by the full 48-man council at a meeting expected to take place within the next couple of weeks. More questions are likely to be asked at that meeting.