And you wonder why people are discouraged -

- From the public consultation process. There is a municipal process underway, and has been for a couple of years now. It is the Official Plan Review. The Official Plan is a mighty document that outlines the rules for the orderly development of the Town for the next decade or so and has to be updated every decade or so. Usually the process entails the Town Planner, the Planning Advisory committee and the pol in charge of planning sitting down with the high priced consultant, who will do the work, and amend the previous document. They will insert the planning flavour of the day, "neighbourhood improvement areas", "Growth Pans", and the current ideas on ways to make the community a better place. Along the way, and following the project management plan - a Gannt chart - there will be spaces for public consultation. The members of the public that actually participate fall into two categories, the idealist and the pragmatists. The idealists are just that, people who see the opportunity to make suggestions about bike paths, trees and sustainable environmetal development. The pragmatists are usually people who can see the way to make a buck. Usually the real estate industry who would like to see more areas of the Town favourably designated. This is an important point because the Zoning Bylaw, which is the document that mandates the mechanism of development, is based on the OP. Get a provision in the OP and you can follow it through to a conclusion that will make you money.
But the point of this post is to show that public consultation is not wanted and in fact discouraged. For example. The final public consultation is taking place next week, but it is an Open House, not a public meeting. This is important as Open Houses, the forum where "tables" are manned by experts to answer the various anticipated questions which can be easily deflected because of the intimate form of the meeting, a far different setup to a "public meeting" where questioners actually have to pose questions at a microphone to a panel or an expert. Two things happen at public meetings: all the audience gets to hear the question posed, and this is good - questions will not be repeated and follow up questions can lead to meaningful discussions about complex issues and the presenters are identified to all.
If an interested party has a serious concern, not satisfied by the answers given at the Open House, they will be asked to put it into writing for the consultant's consideration and to form part of the public record. In the case of the OP review next week the cutoff date for all written responses is the NEXT DAY. So if an interested party has a concern, they had better be prepared to stay up all night reviewing the answers given to them at the Open House, the day before the deadline for submissions. A bad piece of timing, but will in fact discourage some comments.