Tony Tudor, of South Town, Dartmouth, writes:

Having attended the AGM of the Dartmouth Business Improvement District on March 16, I feel that someone needs to give credit to the directors, and particularly Peter Conisbee.

They have taken a brave ­decision knowing that, however they acted, some faction or other would criticise them. I found their dignified, considered and open approach to the problems facing the BID refreshing and their conduct worthy of the respect. They had the courage to face up to the reality of a sad situation and propose a sensible solution.

Their conclusion has clearly not been arrived at lightly. They have provided clear and powerful analysis of the options available to them that may have been able to deliver benefits to the town and address some aspects of the original design, which caused resentment and anger. I agree with their conclusion and will be voting for closure.

I was impressed by the research the board has carried out into modifying the BID to address the main areas of ­contention. I have in the past expressed my concerns about the handling of the difference in the levies between the ‘prospectus’ sent out before the BID vote took place and the levy demands were received, which meant that over 90 per cent of levies were higher than published originally. I was therefore very pleased to see that the board had considered this aspect so carefully.

I was also pleased to see that the board had sent a letter to every levy payer to say how they can take up membership of the BID company. This is a welcome development, as use of email only reaches some of the levy payers.

Whatever happens at the forthcoming extraordinary ­general meeting, no one can claim they do not know how to make their voice heard. That meeting can now be held with the knowledge that those who wish to participate have had the chance to do so.

Many levy payers did not vote originally. In fact, only 197 did so, which represented less than 25 per cent of those eligible. Hopefully, all levy payers now realise that if they don’t vote this time they will hardly be able to complain if they do not like the outcome of the EGM. That applies whatever the outcome of the vote and to both opponents and supporters of the BID.

I believe it is time for people to draw a line under what has proved to be a rancorous and divisive process. I hope that both the vehement opponents of the BID and those who believe anything should be done to stop it closing will reflect on what their rhetoric has done to the town and allow the initiative to be wound up smoothly and swiftly.

I suspect that I speak for many levy payers when I say I was happy that the BID levy could have been applied to things that would have benefited the town. As the board has reported, the process to wind up includes ­provision for unspent levy money to be returned. I for one would be willing to donate any refund to actions and initiatives likely to deliver tangible benefits.

If those with ideas are able to make a case for funding, I would be happy to listen. I believe there are others with a similar attitude, which might help to make the BID’s legacy more positive. The key difference would be that support would be based upon voluntary contributions.

I would certainly not wish to see the BID continue because of some mistaken belief that it can achieve its original objectives in the face of reality. That would merely result in the continued appalling divisions.