THE article headed “Gate opens way to compromise in field dispute” Hereford Times, April 18), while informative, did not fully reflect local opinion.

While accepting that Councillor Jim Kenyon acted in good faith, the proposal is in no way an acceptable compromise to either residents of Park Street, or the many dog owners who use Bartonsham Meadows.

It is a decision agreed between the councillor and church commissioners without any serious effort to enrol those most affected.

The meeting you described was in fact taken on the initiative of Rev Paul Towner, who arranged the venue and leafleted all the households on the south side of Park Street abutting the meadows and chaired the meeting.

Coun Kenyon was invited after constituents made representation to him once the plan for the fence was revealed.

A total of 65 people attended the meeting, the overwhelming majority objecting to the plan. Had it not been for the intervention of Mr Towner and It’s Our County leader Councillor Mark Hubbard, Coun Kenyon would have been hung out to dry for the way.

And contrary to your report, no compromise was reached; the meeting's bottom line was: “This path will happen – get over it.”

While a permissive way does not require the same degree of consultation as a public right of way, it is entirely inappropriate that a decision was taken and public funds allocated without reference to the residents against whose properties the proposed permissive path will run.

Although the two kissing gates have been installed, we understand that due to the path’s intended location upon the Row Ditch, a scheduled ancient monument, English Heritage has become involved and insisted work on the fence stops until the proper planning processes have been followed.

If Coun Kenyon calls this sorry mess a success, I dread to think what his definition of abject failure would look like.

IAN AND HEATHER BROOM, Park Street, Hereford.