Fair enough so it begs the question why they lent/gave them so much in the years past. No other club within the Manchester area has had so much help from the council.
Long story a little long......
At first the council were taken in by the community work they were carrying out - but this wasnt done on a charitable basis. The Rag Socks always ran with the catch all line ''all our profits are ploughed into our community work'', which was a misnomer as they never made a profit (not when the top brass were awarding their mates 30K a year jobs....). The community work was done by applying for grants via various sources to carry out the work - nothing new in the voluntary sector, but in the real world they were being given the money (a lot of it from Manchester City Council) to run activities in areas of Manchester and Bury where they were based at Gigg Lane. The reaity is Manchester city council would close down a youth centre (saving on building costs, knocking down youth centres and selling the land or leasing it out to another organisation) and then tender out work done in local areas and pay voluntary organisations to deliver youth projects. Had these principled socialists had any principles, they would have joined campaigns to fight the closures of youth centres rather than joining the race to receive funding (for which a management fee was placed on top, of course - how else where the top brass receiving 30K each!)
The council (led by Sir Dickie Leese) helped them secure land within the city boundaries to allow the club to ''come home'' - land on Ten Acres Lane, Newton Heath was the proposed site. The Rag Socks spent around 200K on different things like surveying the land and other pre-preparation things, before Manchester City Council pulled the plug on Ten Acres Lane. No reason was officially given to the public, although number one rumour was City felt it was too close to what was being planned around our stadium and pressure had been applied to have Ten Acres Lane pulled. The 200K was lost as the club had not stipulated for a refunding on any outlay should the council renage on the deal on the contract.
Three new sites were identified - the athletics track at Wythenshawe Park, Hough End and Moston. The council went with Moston, saying ''we felt the people of Moston would be less likely to object!'' Ha!
What swung the decision for the council was Moston Juniors FC had been awarded a grant of 750K (by the council) to build changing rooms on the Ronald Johnson Playing Fields (a covenented site) and although that amount would have built the facility it wasnt enough to maintain it etc. So the council paired MJFC with the Rag Socks, adding the 750K to the pot the rags socks already had, and the MJFC would be able to use the facilities in the stadium to get changed in etc. According to a member of MJFC at the time, this split the club in half. He said that the council had told the club at a meeting that if MJFC rejected the deal, once their current deal to use the playing fields ended, it wouldn't be renewed...... a fair few coaches of the junior teams who were Blues went elsewhere to other clubs (and Blue parents of kids went with them) as a result of the club agreeing to the deal.
The subsequent local protest meant the stadium was delayed for 2 years, incurring legal costs for the initial case and the appeal. And of course costs for equipment and other resouces had risen during that time meaning there was a large hole in finances. The council clearly couldn't let the project simply collapse before it began, so a 500K loan (with very generous terms) was given to the club - as well as the lease of the site being at the paltry rate of 125 quid for 100 years...... so the club pays just over a quid in rent per year to the council......
Maybe someone should ask Abbey Hey FC or Chorlton & West Didsbury FC how much rent they pay each year....
8 years on, the council have allowed the money owed to be defaulted to allow the club to continue hoping that one day they will be in a position to pay it back (or even some of it back!) and in the meantime the council continues to pay the club money for use of the facilities such as a venue for covid testing - at one point they were being paid by the council for allowing either large council vehicles or trailors to park over night on the Pallet Park car park!
Can you imagine your neighbour owing you 500K, and you ask him if your mate who is visiting, can park a car on his drive (which is empty at night) and your neighbour - who owes you 500K but has yet to repay back a penny - says ''yes, for 100 quid a night!'' and you agree and pay up!
So the answer to your question is the council have invested so much into this project that to see it go tits up would not only be an embarressment to the council, it would be very costly (to them and rate payers) and would leave them with a rotting white elephant.......
