Is the council consulting the community enough, moreover are they listening?
With the recent canning of several committees, and seemingly low engagement with a recent survey is the council actually able to listen to the community?
On the face of it, 24 responses from more than 1000 interactions seems like a measly reaction to the City of Launceston council's draft housing strategy.
Professor David Adams and City of Launceston chief executive Sam Johnson weigh in on recent community engagement. File pictures
Professor David Adams and City of Launceston chief executive Sam Johnson weigh in on recent community engagement. File pictures
It also seems small compared to the response to other community consultation processes like the Carr Villa Memorial Park Masterplan and the St Leonards and Waverley Neighbourhood Plan.
These received 180 contributions and 68 contributions, respectively, but City of Launceston chief executive Sam Johnson said these numbers alone did not tell the whole story.
He said higher-level documents like the housing strategy generally attracted fewer community responses, due to their specialist nature.
"By contrast, community consultations on issues with more immediate or personal impact - like memorial services or neighbourhood plans - tend to see broader participation," Mr Johnson said.
The level of engagement with other high-level documents, like the proposed budget and annual plan, was similar to that of the housing plan.
These received "between 22 and 24" contributions according to Mr Johnson.
Launceston's Alexandra Suspension Bridge at Cataract Gorge has reopened to the public after a four-month closure for a $1.5 million refurbishment. Video by Joe Colbrook
Is there anybody listening?
Mr Johnson said the council took all community feedback on board, however, not everything was treated equally.
He said the key components of documents like the budget were largely set in stone after internal planning and engagement, but community consultation was an opportunity to inform residents.
In this regard, Mr Johnson said social media posts promoting the draft housing strategy were viewed more than 40,000 times - indicating "significant awareness" of the opportunity to provide feedback.
Mr Johnson said, in any event, feedback from the public was welcome as it helped refine documents.
"We always encourage more community participation, particularly on complex issues like housing, as these policies shape the future of our city," he said.
"It helps us assess whether we're heading in the right direction and often offers valuable commentary on specific elements of a strategy - from the tone and priorities to actionable suggestions on key issues."
Council chief executive officer Sam Johnson. File picture by Phillip Biggs
What about council committees?
The council recently disbanded seven advisory committees, which also provided an opportunity for residents to weigh in on issues.
These were the Cataract Gorge Advisory Committee, the Launceston Access Advisory Committee, the Launceston City Heart Reference Group, the Launceston Sister City Committee, the Tender Review Committee and the Transport Committee.
Only two committees, the council's audit panel and municipal emergency management committee, are required by law.
The rest were formed as special committees in line with the Local Government Act.
An external review commissioned early 2024 found committees had issues with attendance, but also unclear purposes and differing expectations from community members and councillors.
The review said some of the committees had reached a point where they no longer aligned with the council's strategic priorities, and others like the Tender Review Committee had their functions duplicated elsewhere.
"Councils are very good at setting up advisory committees and very bad at understanding when they should be stopped or wound back," UTAS academic David Adams said.
He said the review was a chance to address these issues and create committees that were fit-for-purpose, including when to stop or wind things back.
That could be through so-called "sunset clauses" in their terms of reference, or having a clear outline of each committee's function - community engagement, providing advice, or having decision-making powers.
"The most important thing is building in, at the start of the [committee] process, clear impact expectations and timeframes for completion," Professor Adams said.
"If you're clear on what you hope to achieve and over what period of time, then there's sort of an automatic process of coming to an end."
Professor David Adams. File picture by Scott Gelston
The decision to disband the committees was not welcomed by all, however
Although not a member of the Cataract Gorge Advisory Committee, Rocelyn Ives is a passionate advocate for the Gorge having been a volunteer there and also campaigned for its preservation as part of Hands Off Our Gorge.
She agreed with the findings of the committee review, having sat on the Heritage Committee and experienced some of the issues firsthand.
However, the council's decision to disband the committees without an alternative concerned her, particularly as the Gorge is a key natural asset for Launceston - beloved by residents and tourists alike.
"It's almost like we know that we can do it better, but how can we do it better?" Ms Ives said.
"In the meantime, what are we going to have as a voice from the community? Anything could happen."
There was some chatter around the council about creating a group to oversee all council reserves.
Ms Ives said this would be a welcome development, but a future organisation overseeing the Gorge had to abide by three principles - wide representation, protecting natural values, and ensuring the community remained a major focus when managing the Gorge.
There was also a fourth issue at hand.
"Committees need to have some teeth," Ms Ives said.
Cataract Gorge. File picture by Paul Scambler
More important than ever
Further comments from the council about the future direction of the remaining committees were not forthcoming.
However, The Examiner understands a further review is likely, following the adoption of a new 10-year strategic plan which was also out for community consultation in recent months.
Professor Adams said Launceston had historically led the way in its community engagement strategy, and much of what the council did had become mandatory for all local governments over time.
He said any community engagement needed to be representative of the whole population.
This meant ensuring the 30-odd per cent of Launceston residents who did not use the internet could still have their say.
It also meant creating committees that were not just made up of people with the "loudest voices" and time to devote to the meetings, possibly through compensating members for their contributions.
Professor Adams said these people were not necessarily the most impacted by council decisions.
There was also the prospect of creating review committees, which would allow residents to keep the council accountable beyond the blunt instrument of elections.
Professor Adams said having robust, well-thought-out, and adaptable community engagement processes was more important than ever as councils took on more and more responsibilities.
"Traditionally, the elected representatives were the ones who reflected the views of the community," he said.
"Because of the volume and complexity of issues, councillors and councils need to engage to ensure that they've covered the range of ideas and interests and values that might be at play."
No comments:
Post a Comment