Martin McGowan-Scanlon, of Stoke Fleming, Dartmouth, writes: I read with interest your front-page report about the Business Improvement District and how its directors say they are all volunteers and need further support, Chronicle, May 8. While I applaud anyone who volunteers, it seems to me that the fundamental problem with the BID has not been addressed. Of course, as stated, it is positive to invest £172,000 into the town, but the needs of the large hotel in the town and the local pet shop are very unlikely to be met with a one-size-fits-all solution. In fact, it strikes me that advertisements such as 'Putting the Cat out Dartmouth Style' are limited in benefit to just a very few businesses in the town. Of course, for a larger business, investing a few thousand towards a marketing plan makes sense when it will benefit from the whole plan, but for a much smaller, less tourist-orientated business it can hardly be claimed to be cost-effective. If not handled for the benefit of all, then this situation will lead to a feeling of 'them and us'. This is further exacerbated of course by those who do benefit from the plan, volunteering to help manage it because, of course, there is a vested interest. Those who don't benefit feel hard done by and do not wish to help spend their money when it can't possibly benefit them under the current marketing plan. While the current directors are indeed volunteers, the BID ought to be run – if indeed a sensible plan can be delivered – without those benefitting being in charge of it. There needs to be an absolutely unbiased, non-benefitting chair and a committee of people with business acumen but without an agenda. Otherwise the whole thing won't work and there will only be discord. The BID members can have a say via a questionnaire and the board must be trusted to deliver a plan or plans that benefit all. No point in irritating many businesses in town, sending in bailiffs simply so that one or two can benefit from a large marketing budget paid for by all. Time for a fresh start.
More About:
Comments
This article has no comments yet. Be the first to leave a comment.