We are members of the Glendaruel and Colintraive community who feel that we need serious negotiations regarding the lease of Stronafian Forest. This site outlines the background of the lease, what we can do about it as a community and relevant news.
Stronafian Forest, located adjacent to the Clachan of Glendaruel, comprising approximately 615 Ha, with 512 ha of forestry plantations, was acquired by the CGDT (Colintraive and Glendaruel Trust) in September of 2019.
In order to finance the Forests ‘ purchase the CGDT leased the Forest to Stakis Forestry for 99 years ( or an effective term of 140 years unless the CGDT compensated Stakis Forestry for certain costs), for £1.3 million (there were a number of other options available to the CGDT, as described by independent consultants advice obtained by the CGDT however these other options were not pursued).
Stakis Forestry has now earned an estimated £5 million, tax free, from timber sales to date and it is estimated that Stakis Forestry could earn in excess of £26 million over the term of the Lease. Stakis ‘ majority shareholder is the Stakis Charitable Foundation.
The question has arisen as to how the CGDT could possibly enter into such a Lease on terms so disadvantageous to itself and the community?
Since September 2019, three Reports have been prepared on this matter:
The ‘Report into The Purchase and Lease of the Stronafian Forest’;
The CGDT Report commissioned by the CGDT and prepared by Mr. Andrews ( a Former Director of the CGDT); and
The CGDT Report commissioned by the CGDT and prepared by a working group Chaired by Mr. John Allan.
All 3 Reports raised serious concerns as to the Lease and how it was negotiated. As of this date, the CGDT has not released, either to its Members, or the community The Andrews Report or the Allan Report.
Why was the Lease so adverse to the CGDT and community?
Lying at the heart of the issue seems to be that the CGDT failed to obtain independent advice. The CGDT hired Digby Guy, a long-term business advisor of Andros Stakis, to advise it on the acquisition and lease of the Forest. The CGDT’s own publicly available Minutes reveal that Digby Guy was hired by the CGDT and in return, would receive his remuneration from timber sales. No written contract between these parties has been made available. Nobody knows what the remit of Digby Guy was, nor what he actually received for his services.
The fact that Digby Guy was to be paid by timber sales, necessarily meant he would receive remuneration from Stakis Forestry- an obvious conflict in and of itself. The CGDT understood that Digby Guy was acting in its best interests, however, Andros Stakis has confirmed that Digby Guy was always representing Stakis Forestry.
It is no wonder that this obvious conflict gave rise to the issues before us.
At the last CGDT AGM, the Membership appointed Mr. Allan to ‘negotiate the best possible outcome’ with Stakis, with no limitations on such mandate.
The Lease entered into by the CGDT was considered to be so one-sided as to be unconscionable and that the only reason legal action was not initiated was because of statutory time limitations. However, moving forwards we are hopeful that Andros Stakis, knowing the detailed circumstances of this transaction, will consider several options to address the wrongs perpetrated by the Lease.
Moving forward we would like to see the following matters specifically discussed with Andros Stakis:
AMENDMENT TO LEASE TERM
The lease has a 99-year term ( or effective 140-year lease unless certain additional payments are paid to Stakis). As a matter of principle, we believe a shorter term should be negotiated allowing Stakis to receive an agreed return on his investment.
Stakis invested £1.3 million.
Would Stakis consider a shorter term if he received: £5 million return?; £7 million return? £10 million return? How much does Stakis want to shorten the term of the lease? Note: all timber revenues are tax-free.
RENEWABLE ENERGY/CARBON CAPTURE
The Lease states that if any projects of the above-noted type were considered, and that If the forestry area is reduced,Stakis receives compensation from the CGDT of 15% of any income.
This provision should be removed.
SSE PAYMENTS RE CRUACH MOR SCREEN
These payments are legally required to be paid to Stakis. There was absolutely no reason why these should have ever gone to Stakis.
This provision should be amended to ensure such payments are made to the CGDT.
‘PENALTY’ ASPECT RE LEASE TERM
This provision states that certain costs sustained by Stakis over the 99 year term must be paid to Stakis, failing which, the Lease continues to an effective term of 140 years. This is in effect what we consider a ‘penalty’ provision which essentially means unless the CGDT compensates Stakis for certain costs, the lease extends for a further 40 years.
This provision should be removed.
DEER CULLING RIGHTS
These rights were also given to Stakis.
This provision should be removed,
JOINT PROJECT ASPECTS
Would Stakis consider entering into ‘mutually’ beneficial projects with the CGDT?
No one knows what these projects could be, of what nature, and of course their timing. While Mr. Allan is exploring these aspects it should be noted that ‘an Agreement to Agree’ to work together on some unknown aspect, is no legal agreement at all.
This is why many of us in the community strongly believe that the best possible outcome for the CGDT must be a negotiated reduction in the Term of the Lease.
PROFIT SHARE
Based on the circumstances we see no reason why we should not negotiate a reasonable and fair profit share agreement on timber revenues.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE NEGOTIATED?
Share your comments with us by emailing your response to:
savestronafianforest@gmail.com
Provided to you by members of the community.
CGDT DIRECTORS PUT ON THE SPOT OVER POTENTIAL CONFLICTS
Well, that didn’t take very long…. at the CGDT Board Meeting concerns were raised by Members and others over certain conflicts that may arise between the CGDT interests and those of a new company called Glendaruel CIC, incorporated on Dec 7, 2021. Its Directors and Shareholders are noted as Charles and Sadie Dixon-Spain, Cathleen Russell,Kirsty McLuckie ,and Fiona Hamilton.
The terms of reference were very similar for both the CGDT and Glendaruel CIC so one has to wonder what this was all about.
Questions asked were raised at a CGDT Meeting by Members and others as to potential conflicts of interest between those involved with the Glendaruel CIC and the CGDT. A heated debate was had. The upshot of this was that by October of 2022 Cathleen Russell, Kirsty McLuckie and Fiona Hamilton all resigned as Directors of Glendaruel CIC. But are they still shareholders? What was their real goal and why did they resign?
MEMBERS AND THE COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION… TO BE LIMITED
Since 2019, efforts have been made to have the CGDT conduct its business in public. Finally, at the last, AGM, the Chair, Cathleen Russell announced that the CGDT Board meetings would be open to Members and the community….wow! What a great step
Forward! Transparency=Accountability!
Hold it…not so fast… Members now cannot observe proceedings and any questions asked will not form part of the Minutes for follow-up. Why do the Directors want to minimize Members' participation? They clearly have not figured out that they were appointed by the members, to serve the Members and community.
PROJECT PROTOCOLS…. GONE MISSING!
At the last AGM, the Members passed a resolution appointing a director to prepare Project Protocols (ie Guidelines to be considered by the Board in relation to analyzing the purpose; benefit; costs-capital/operating, and most importantly Member and community support.
Such Project Protocols were duly submitted to the Board in March. Yet none have been approved or adopted …and not surprisingly the Board has initiated a new project ( the PolyTunnel Project) without any consideration of any Project Protocols.
When will the Board officially adopt Project Protocols that their own Members specifically required you to do?
FEEDING THE MACHINE...
It seems that one of the previous and current CGDT Board missions has been the desire to fund staff positions regardless of either the need or resources available.
The Board’s ‘empire building’ focus continues… with its associated addiction as a subsidy junkie.
The questions that should be asked:
Do we really need paid staff considering the financial circumstances?
Why can we not have volunteers assist in basic bookkeeping or outdoor maintenance activities? The use of volunteers increases community participation keeps costs down and minimizes the constant quest to access taxpayer funding for questionable projects.
KEEPING IT ALL IN THE FAMILY
Ever wonder why a small group of like-minded people control everything?
Have you noticed:
Who controls the Village Halls?
Who controls the CGDT?
Who controls the Cruach Mor Windfarm Trust?
Who controls the Col-Glen Council?
Who controls the Kilmodan Acre Trust?
Just take a look at the leadership of these organizations… the same people, same thoughts, same agendas… a bit like musical chairs really… and unless you are on their wavelength you will definitely not be invited. Groupthink all day long. Oh… and you might see how the finances are often intertwined!
DIRECTORS SEEK TO LIMIT ALLAN’S MANDATE
Mr. Allan was appointed by the Members (not the Board) of the CGDT to negotiate ‘the best possible outcome for the CGDT in relation to the Forest Lease.
He is not subject to the Board’s control or direction. While no doubt, John Allan will seek the views and advice of any and all, including the Board, and any experts he deems appropriate, his mandate cannot be curtailed or otherwise modified by the Board. He also formally required to report to the Members, not the Board, in relation to his negotiations.
An anonymous party recently disclosed that the Board sought to limit and interfere with the mandate expressly provided by the Members to John Allan. Some members suspect that the Board seeks to essentially kick meaningful negotiations into the long grass.
ANOTHER PROJECT…ANOTHER GRANT… ANOTHER PROJECT HITS THE SKIDS
In 2021, to the surprise of the Board (other than Chair Cathleen Russell), the Board was advised that a grant for a Vending Machine had been applied for and received. There were no project protocols followed. No Directors, Members or the community were consulted. (This is why Members passed a motion at the last AGM requiring that the Board have specific Project Protocols and yet has not been adopted by the Board).
The CGDT had the machine delivered… to storage. Yes, there was no place where it could go! Ok, no problem… it can be put into the Glendaruel Village Hall… without of course first checking if the neighbors were happy with this (they were not), and of course without checking to see if it would fit through the Village Hall doors… it didn't! Needless to say, we have a vending machine still in storage!
IT'S OFFICIAL… ANDROS STAKIS CONFIRMS DIGBY GUY WAS RETAINED BY HIM
Andros Stakis has confirmed that Digby Guy acted for him and his interests in relation to the Forest Lease.
The CGDT, in its own publicly available Minutes, stated that Digby Guy was hired by them and would be compensated by them. Based on what we now know so far, Digby Guy appeared to have been advising BOTH parties.
How could Digby Guy objectively safeguard the CGDT interests if he was actually working for Stakis and knew he was being compensated by Stakis. From an objective perspective, the Lease totally favored Stakis.
Did Digby Guy advise either the CGDT or Stakis that he was acting for both? The CGDT Directors knew Digby Guy would have to be paid by Stakis but they did not seem to care about the obvious conflict which resulted in an adverse result for the CGDT, its Members, and the community.
To us, as members of the community, the conflict of interest was pretty obvious and the results are there for all to see. Surely Andros Stakis and the Stakis Charitable Foundation could now set matters right by renegotiating the Lease.
As they say…'Never has so much been taken by so few from so many.'
CRUACH MOR WINDFARM TRUST IS BEING ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS
Members of the community are asking lots of questions about the Cruach Mor Windfarm Trust (CMWT)
Did you know:
The CMWT spent thousands supporting the CGDT?
The CMWT no longer identifies all the recipients of its funds?
Questions are being asked about how certain funds have been transferred from the CMWT to the CGDT ‘under cover’ ( ie., not transparently disclosed) …
The investigation continues…..
UPCOMING NEWS...
Community interviews and the latest news on the January 2023 CGDT Annual General Meeting.
If you have news, let us know. "Transparency means accountability."