by Paul Schachter Our digital age has helped create a more educated and informed public, one that insists on increased openness, accountability and responsiveness in government. That’s a good thing. Forward thinking governments understand that better decision making comes when their processes are transparent, participatory and collaborative.
City of Powell River took a step toward improved decision making when it adopted a public consultation plan for the liquid waste processing changes that included an open house to share information, a “world café” where residents could discuss their views and explore possibilities, and a town hall meeting where residents could engage and interact with decision makers.
But wait. There is a problem. The current plan is to have the town hall meeting only after the decision on sewage is made. I’ve looked everywhere to find any example of a town hall meeting that was held after a decision. I could not find one.
The concept of town hall meetings comes from the style of government used in the United States. For over 300 years, citizens in the New England region have gathered to decide on issues of importance to their communities, like budgeting, infrastructure, purchase of major equipment and things like that.
From those beginnings, town hall meetings evolved into any public gathering where residents have the opportunity to discuss issues and to voice concerns and preferences for their community. Both citizens and officials attend town hall meetings, giving everyone a chance to talk personally about the things that matter to them.
Town hall meetings on an issue are always held before a decision so that citizens have the chance to ask their own questions and hear answers straight from the decision makers. It also benefits legislators by allowing them to demonstrate that they understand the complexities and consequences of their decisions. By having to articulate their reasoning, decision makers have the opportunity to test out whether their views are aligned with the electorate. If not, they have the time to formulate positions consistent with the desires of the community or to provide additional information to convince the community of the merit of their position. All of that is defeated if a town hall meeting takes place after a decision is made.
Councillors have expressed concern that participating in a town hall meeting before the decision would simply make them the target of criticism by the loudest voices. That does happen at times, especially when government has only made room to hear public opinion hours or days before the decision. It is natural that at times of transformation opinions can become very charged. The best public consultations take place over several months to allow for a real dialogue and not just an opportunity to vent. Anyone who was at the recent world café at Dwight Hall had to be impressed by the calm, productive and beneficial tone of the evening. Diverging opinion is an engine that produces innovative solutions. There is no reason why this spirit cannot carry forward into the next phase of the consultation.
Perhaps it is not too late to alter the timing of the town hall meeting.
Paul Schachter has worked as a public interest lawyer, mediator and facilitator.
