Mayo County Council to issue vesting order on Keel Sandybanks CPO

Mayo County Council have confirmed that they intend to advertise for the vesting order to finalise the Compulsory Purchase of the Keel Sandybanks on Achill Island, 56 years after the CPO was signed off.

In an extraordinary revelation, the Head of the Westport/Belmullet Municipal District, Seamus Ó Mongáin confirmed that it is the plan of Mayo County Council to complete the CPO of 440 acres of the Achill Mission Estate including the Keel Sandybanks in the coming weeks.

The matter was raised by Achill-based councillor Paul McNamara who questioned Mayo County Council over their claim to the Keel Sandybanks after he received information that the Compulsory Purchase Order was signed by the the Mayo County Manager, Liam McLoughlin on February 12, 1970 and signed off by the then Minister for Local Government, Robert Molloy on October 2, 1970.

“From the information I have recently uncovered, it appears that Mayo County Council owns a golf course, a campsite, a football pitch, a tennis court and approximately 400 acres of grazing land,” Cllr McNamara told the meeting.

“Despite my efforts, I have been unable to uncover any clear record of compensation, legal representation, or how the shareholders' interests were dealt with. I find this deeply concerning. We're talking about hundreds of acres of land and 557 shareholders. Yet, 56 years later, fundamental questions remain unanswered.

He continued: “I was first elected to Mayor County Council in 2014. Throughout my time as an elected representative, whenever issues arose concerning the Keel Sandybanks including permits, wild camping, and the management of these lands, I was constantly informed that Mayo County Council could do nothing because the lands are privately owned by 557 shareholders.

“Yet now the information I have uncovered suggests that Mayo County Council itself owns substantial portions of these very lands. So I have to ask, which is it? Are these lands privately owned by the shareholders, as I have repeatedly been told , or are they owned by Mayo County Council?

“And if the council owns them, why was this not made clear when I raised concern on behalf of the people of Achill? Only recently I raised an issue at a municipal district meeting concerning two poles erected by a service provider on the scenic approach to Keel village, an area where services had previously been placed underground to protect the visual amenity.

“I asked a straightforward question: Who gave permission for those poles to be erected, Mayo County Council failed to provide me with an answer identifying who authorised the work,” he said.

Questions

The ownership of the Keel Sandybanks has been a matter of contention on Achill Island for over 20 years with Mayo County Council claiming ownership of it while locals believe it is part of the Achill Mission Estate and owned by over 500 shareholders who claim grazing rights.

Last February, the renewal of a lease for the Keel Caravan Park located on the Keel Sandybanks was deferred after Cllr McNamara asked for Mayo County Council to provide the title on the caravan park before the renewal can be agreed.

Cllr McNamara told yesterday's meeting he did so because of a dispute at the time and wanted clarity on the matter.

“I was not aware of any of this in February. I thought Mayo County Council just owned the campsite and that was theirs, and everything else belonged to the Achill Mission Estate, which is 557 shareholders. In the past few weeks, I just came to the knowledge that I have found out that they own actually 440 acres.

“So I suppose we are where we are. I don't know what the implications are for the farming community. I don't know what the implications are for the community itself. I don't know what implications are for the shareholders, and I don't know what implications it's for the golf course. But Mayo County Council are now as good as Donald Trump, you have a prime golf course in the scenic area,” he said.

Cllr McNamara pointed out in his opening remarks that a signed CPO “does not, in itself, establish that every necessary legal step in the acquisition was completed” and wanted clarity on the vesting order.

“I have also been informed by Mayo County Council that the vesting order will be issued in the coming weeks. Is the Council providing a copy of an existing vesting order, or is a new order being proposed? This is a crucial distinction that requires clarification. Based on the documentation I have uncovered, I have not seen sufficient evidence to satisfy me that the acquisition was properly completed or that the shareholders interest were fully addressed.

“While missing records do not automatically prove that a transaction was invalid, I do not believe the Council's claimed ownership should simply be accepted without the supporting legal documentation being produced and examined.

“I believe this ownership must now be subjected to independent legal scrutiny and if warranted, formally challenged.

“What I find particularly alarming is that I was not even born when this Compulsory Purchase Order was signed. An entire generation has passed. Many of the original shareholders may no longer be alive, yet their children and grandchildren are still left asking questions.

“Here we are in 2026, still asking who represented those shareholders, whether compensation was paid and how ownership was legally acquired,” he said.

Farmers rights

The Fianna Fáil councillor said that local farmers were receiving farm payments by claiming ownership of the Sandybanks and asked for their rights to be protected.

“We must also recognise the farming community, in which there are approximately 350 active farmers receiving payments who have produced documentation over the last number of decades in order to draw down agricultural payments. These farmers have relied on these lands as part of their livelihoods, and I believe their long-standing grazing rights and farming interests must be fully recognised and protected.

“They should not be placed at a disadvantage or face uncertainty through no fault of their own because of the unresolved questions surrounding ownership dating back 56 years. The farm community deserves clarity, certainty, and protection, not to become another casualty of a historical dispute over land ownership.

“In my opinion, this raises the possibility of a grave historical injustice, not only to the original shareholders but also to the generations who came after them. The passage of time does not remove the obligation to account for decisions made in the past. I want to highlight the fundamental questions that Mayo County Council must now address.

“Firstly, the shareholders: who represented the 557 shareholders? What compensation did they receive, and where are the records? Secondly, the legal acquisition: where is the evidence that the CPO was properly implemented, and what exactly is the position regarding the vesting order? Thirdly, the land registry. Why do the land registry records differ from the original CPO, and what documentation explains the discrepancies?

“Fourthly, ownership and accountability. Why was I repeatedly told since 2014 that these lands were privately owned when the information I have uncovered suggests otherwise? Who is responsible for managing these lands and authorising works upon them? I'm calling for a full and transparent examination of the original CPO, the vesting documentation, the land registry records, the compensation agreements, and the legal basis of Mayor County Council's claimed ownership.

“This is about accountability, transparency, and above all, justice. 56 years is long enough. The shareholders deserve answers then, their descendants deserve answers now, and the people of Actor deserve nothing less than the truth,” he said.

Security of tenure

When questioned by Cllr McNamara on why all the information was only coming to light after 56 years, Mr Ó Mongáin said he became aware of the CPO in question earlier in the year. He said that the documents are with the Department of Local Government and all the shareholders are mentioned in them.

He said he could not answer all the questions asked by the councillor but added that to his understanding a Mr Lavelle was a representative of the shareholders in 1970 and there was one objection to the CPO at a public hearing.

“The process went through the normal CPO process up to and including a public hearing and it was my understanding there was one objector at that hearing. It is historical going back to 1970 and the records are quite voluminous so there is a lot of material in it. The vesting element in it is the last stage of the procedural element which records the land registry as fact,” he explained.

When asked why the vesting element was only taking place 56 years later, Mr Ó Mongáin said this was happening now to provide security of tenure for the lease on the Keel caravan park. He added it was not unusual for vesting orders to be lodged for many years.

Cllr McNamara claimed that there was no proof that the shareholders of the Achill Mission Estate received compensation as part of the CPO.

“It beggars belief that it falls on my head to deliver this news to the 557 shareholders that 440 acres was taken over by the council.

“I want to point out, Seamus, I'm not pointing a finger at all at you. This happened 56 years ago, but a lot of politicians have sat in my seat here. Why wasn't it raised before now? How does it fall on me to raise this and to come on the findings that's here today.

“The farming community believes that they own that land. They have submitted documentation time and time again over decades. But I have let the genie out of the bottle. Whatever the consequences will be. I think be it on me, or be it on the council or be on the shareholders. I believe in full transparency on it, and the vesting order, if it appears in the paper, so be it.

“I'm very annoyed. I'm very annoyed at what has happened here, what could have been and what's not,” he said.

Report

Cathaoirleach of the municipal district, Cllr Brendan Mulroy said that if the shareholders receive compensation, Mayo County Council will have documentation to prove this. Cllr McNamara said the shareholders deserve clarity on this but it is his understanding they were not paid any compensation.

After a lengthy debate on the matter, it was agreed that the matter will be referred to the legal section of Mayo County Council for a report on the CPO at the December meeting of the Westport/Belmullet Municipal District meeting.

“It has to all come out,” Cllr McNamara said. “The shareholders categorically are in the opinion that they are the owners of that land and commonage. So I hate to be the bearer of the news to them today to me that it appears to be otherwise.

“I'm just asking the questions that I'm going to be asked in the coming days. So, whenever the information can be provided and the questions raised, I can sit with any of the council officials and clarify once and for all on the 440 acres of the Achill Mission Estate,” he said.