Skip to main content

Democracy doesn't mean you get your way - Part 1

Open Houses and Public Hearings: 
Public Deliberation, not Delegated Decision-Making

Unfortunately, and contrary to popular belief, showing up at an open house or public hearing does not mean you get to veto issues that are going forward to council. Quite often, participants in municipal consultation events are frustrated and disheartened that their feedback does not lead to obvious and explicit policy change. "But I live in the neighbourhood! I should be able to say what gets built, and what doesn't!" These sentiments are common, especially at the municipal level when rezoning applications are put forward, or communities are reviewing their Official Community Plans (OCP's) to accommodate new and different developments.

Which begs the question - why bother holding open houses or public hearings at all?

Making decisions democratically is not always straight forward. Once we get beyond foundational elements of a democratic society (rule of law, freedom of speech, equality of votes) we're faced with figuring out how to actually make decisions. In the case of local municipal councils, once individuals have been elected to public office, in theory they should be empowered to make any decisions they like within the bounds of the law. However, many municipalities require certain decisions (like rezoning applications) to be brought forward in a public hearing.

In cases like these, are city councils expected to delegate their decision-making to members of the public? No. They are still the final decision-makers. They were elected, and they are the ones who will be held responsible for the city's decisions. Individuals who contribute to a public hearing or an open house bear no responsibility, and are not accountable to anyone other than themselves.

However, good decision-making is characterized by a robust review of all the options available. Complex issues require careful consideration, and are ideally coupled with informed deliberation. Public consultation does not mean delegated decision-making; public consultation, or public participation in decision-making, means a diverse group of members of the public have brought forward information in order for members of council to make an informed decision.

Unfortunately, that means that contributing at a public hearing or an open house is not an opportunity to exercise your right to participate directly in democratic decision-making. You are helping to equip elected officials to make an informed decision, and contributing to the public deliberation surrounding the issue. You are contributing to a healthy democracy not by making a final decision, but by informing and sharing values with those who are accountable and responsible to make a final decision (in this case anyway). 

If, however, you feel like like public hearings or open houses leave much to be desired when it comes to deliberation, that is a fair criticism. There are better ways to augment public discourse and achieve these aims, as outlined in this post

When it comes to different ways groups of people can actually make decisions when they have been delegated decision-making power, this is what we'll get into in Part 2, coming out next week. 

Unfortunately, it still doesn't mean you get your way.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Including rational thought in decision-making: novel idea?

The post last week brought up the idea that we need to think about what concepts and ideas are put forward in the public realm. From pop music to sports to local community events, our approach to decision-making is influenced by commonly understood cultural practices. Meaningful democratic decision-making requires that we think about the practices, ideas, and values that percolate throughout society. More specifically, when it comes to engaging a group of people to get together and go through a democratic decision-making process, practitioners need to think about how participants are being, or have been, educated. By definition, democratic decision-making is not limited to specialists. "Rule by the people" means everyone gets to participate in decision-making, even about issues where we are not experts. This does not mean, however, that democratic decision-making should be approached from a place of ignorance.  Robert Dahl  emphasized the importance of  enlight

Freedom to do stuff vs. freedom from stuff

As our children grow up we typically give them more freedom and discretion over the activities they will pursue, and increasing freedom of choice when it comes to who they will associate with and the type of education they want. It's commonly accepted that freedom from tyranny, oppression, and control is a hallmark of a democratic society; we should be free to lead and build a life of our choosing. Leading and guiding one another to a life of freedom is a great privilege that many communities are still fighting and striving towards.  However, when our children are young, we're a bit more directive. When I wake up my daughters in the morning, whether they get dressed, eat breakfast, and get ready for school is not up for discussion or deliberation. At first, commanding them when to put on their shoes might seem to contravene their freedom of choice. Am I restraining their liberty? Obstructing their progress as free individuals? In directing them through these activities,

Why independence matters for a democracy...and what the heck is an ombudsperson?!?

Remember this definition of accountability, from a previous post : "the relationship between the local population and their representatives, and the mechanisms through which citizens can ensure that decision-makers are answerable for decisions made."  - from the   Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance In British Columbia (Canada) there are over 2800 local and public authorities, not including actual government offices or departments. Sufficed to say, that's a lot of decision makers. How are citizens supposed to make sure decision-makers are answerable? This is the intended role of the ombudsperson (previously ombudsman). This office is an independent agent that has the power to investigate and examine the activities of public officials and bodies. An ombudsperson is intended to represent the interests of the public, those served by public bodies, and make determinations about whether their actions are aligned with policy and legislation, to examine p