MR CA Ellis, of Ascot, Berkshire, writes: Firstly, let us say that we have found the Dartmouth Chronicle a lifeline – not only the publication itself but also its web­site – during the last 12 months since a group of Dart­mouth business people bought the BID to the forefront. The Chronicle's articles have been explicit, fair and unbiased. The staff at the Chronicle's Kingsbridge head office have been most obliging in helping me to research the public notices published between August and November 2013, with regards to notification of a BID?ballot. Alas, I could not find any. I advise Francesca Johnson, Letters, June 19, and her buddies not to throw stones in glass­houses.  In order for you to get a real appreciation of the anger felt by more than 450 levy payers in Dartmouth, I refer you to an an article from a newspaper in another area, where their BID has been questioned. In March this year, the Great Yarmouth Mercury reported that businesses fighting the way a controversial 'tourism tax' had been administered were pleased their concerns were at last being listened to. To quote from the paper: 'They were responding to news announced yesterday that the board of the borough-wide business improvement district was considering measures to significantly reduce the number of businesses liable to pay the tax or at least cut the amount they have to pay.' The Mercury continued: 'The BID has struggled to win over traders from the outset, with many claiming they had never been made aware of it or sent ballot papers for the vote that established it last year. 'There has also been dissent from businesses such as hairdressers and car dealers who say they should not have to pay a levy to fund tourism.' The then Local Goverment Minister Penny Mordaunt had written to the BID board chairman David Marsh suggesting it held a new ballot 'to provide a fresh start' for the BID. The newspaper adds: 'While legislation would rule out a fresh vote on whether to establish the BID, an "alteration ballot" – if approved – would allow significant changes such as reducing its geographical area, altering the amount levied or changing the types of businesses liable to pay the tax.' Mr Marsh is reported as say­ing that, after discussions with the BID's consultants at the Mosaic Partner­ship, the BID would be looking at ways to exclude certain businesses from the BID or at least reduce the amount they had to pay. The paper adds: 'The board would be looking at whether it could simply make the decision or whether an alteration ballot had to be called which might take months to organise.' Regards to all the team at the Dartmouth Chronicle – and please keep up the good work.