Airfield vs. Entertainment complex - who wins?
Whatever the cost of capital to build the stadium and peripheral facilities, hotels etc. the long term economic benefits thereafter to High Wycombe are exponentially greater than those gained from a continuation of activities as a minor aerodrome. Once established, the whole complex will be a magnet, just outside of London, for events, conferences, concerts, meetings, product launches, you name it, nothing to do with football or rugby whatsoever. The ground rent and business rates paid today are a pin-prick compared to the sums of money the proposed development will generate for the local authority which of course will ultimately reduce the amount of council tax local have to pay to run the region. The percieved benefit is that huge boost to the local economy and the anticipated reduction in aircraft noise versus a little bit more road traffic on match days and when they might have a big pop concert etc. which, by default, will tend not to be midday, mid-week.
The arguments to keep the airfield soley as an airfield are pretty thin from the persepective of a local tax payer. It's the banks, private financiers and developers who will foot the bill, not the neighbours.
You are going to have to fight very hard and dirty to win this one - and there is no evidence whatsoever that the airport management have started that fight with more than a little whimper. They've paid a peppercorn rent for years and now it's time to wake up.
The pro-airfield arguments on employment and economic benefit are going to be hopeless and so you need to find more emotional, legal and political strings to your bow to fight the good cause for aviation.