A council leader has said discussions are underway with a potential tenant for a former Debenhams high street store while defending the decision to buy the building.
Stockton Council bought the old Debenhams building on Stockton High Street as it planned to deliver a “municipal quarter”, with a 25-year blueprint for regenerating central Stockton and north Thornaby. However the Labour-run authority’s decision was questioned by the town’s Conservative leader for taking an “inherently significant risk” with taxpayers’ money.
Council leader and Labour group leader Councillor Bob Cook told how they took “swift action” to buy the building, and since had “productive discussions with potential tenants”. He was responding to a question from Conservative group leader Cllr Tony Riordan, who asked at a full council meeting: “Do you think it is appropriate that members should discover about such a significant purchase via the press, and that the decision to do so was not recorded on the council’s register, which is open to the public?”
Cllr Cook said the council had already owned part of the Debenhams building through its purchase of Wellington Square, but did not own the front part. When the clothes chain went into administration, the building was split into two, with no wall separating the two units.
He said: “Bringing both parts of the building back into single ownership was critical to ensuring the site could be brought back into productive use. A key objective was the regeneration of our town centre.
“When we learned that the front part of the building owned by a property company was due to go up for public auction, this represented a significant risk of losing control of the front section and would create a barrier to revitalising the entire site and potentially left to blight.
“Through direct discussions with the owners and agents, we had the opportunity to remove the building from the auction and secure it through a private sale. This required swift action as the auction date was approaching. We secured an independent valuation to ensure the price was fair.”
He said a decision made by officers was recorded but not published as it contained sensitive details which could have compromised the council’s negotiating position or financial interests if disclosed: “In this case keeping information confidential was crucial to avoid competition that could have driven up the purchase price. Both members and officers have a duty to respect these confidentiality boundaries.
“Since taking control of the old building we have been able to have more productive discussions with potential tenants. I’m pleased to report we have a strong interest.
“We are discussing terms with a potential tenant. While further work is needed to reach a final agreement, the progress would not have been possible without securing overall control of the site. The decision was properly recorded, appropriately confidential and in the public interest.”
Cllr Riordan questioned the decision in October 2023 to buy the store “for £500,000 plus stamp duty, land tax and associated fees” – while, he said, failing to order a detailed structural survey, failing to budget for repairs and maintenance and failing to identify a tenant for costs of at least £70,000 a year. That, he argued, “has created an inherently significant risk to the council taxpayers of this borough”.
Cllr Cook said: “It would have been complicated if we hadn’t bought it because we owned part of it and the developer who was selling it had the other part. We are talking with somebody who’s interested in going in, we’ve had detailed talks with them to move in there so we’re hopeful that will happen in the near future.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here