Every so often, a curve ball will get thrown at me that makes me rethink what I thought were fairly fundamental values, and that happened to me courtesy of (CODC) CEO Sanchia Jacobs during the Long-Term Plan (LTP) process.

I love the engagement the LTP brings and I love the way the connection between the council and community has grown over time, with submissions going from 200+ in 2015 to 400+ in 2018 to close to 900 this time around. 

I was also really pleased with record numbers of people coming to the community boards and council to speak to their submissions.  

However, Sanchia raised a thought with me that’s been rattling around in my head ever since.  

That thought is that the people who speak to their submissions get two bites of the cherry, one written and one verbal.  And is there a risk that, such is human nature, a deeper impact might be made on elected members by a spoken than a written submissions?

And here’s the rub. Those people who come to speak to their submissions are, generally, those who are retired or can afford time off work to do so.  

Fair play and sincere thanks to them for taking the time to do so, but I am left asking myself if this is fair and if this is healthy for democracy?  

I’m still thinking about it now and wonder what your thoughts are.