2016-01-11 General Committee Agenda

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                11 JANUARY 2016


3.    Juror feedback

Juror feedback from the first Community Jury about the process was overwhelmingly positive. In
comparison, juror feedback from the second Community Jury about the process was mixed,
although jurors commended Council highly for the Community Jury initiative.

Direct feedback from Noosa River jurors included:

 “I found it a good experience and enjoyed the process. I would recommend attending the
   Community Jury to anyone. Thanks to Council for the opportunity.”

 “I applaud the concept of community involvement in decision making and am sure that the Jury
   process is a precursor to a more general application of this in future political decision making.”

 “Brain-storming continued too long. Bland re-assurances of good progress were offered when
   I and others raised concerns about the lack of meeting structure and lack of a top-down
   approach to identifying inter-dependent decision points.”

 “Some obvious out-of-scope issues were continually raised, discussed and subject to Jury
   presentations when priority in-scope issues had yet to be properly identified and
   addressed. Tighter control of priorities was needed before out-of-scope issues were dealt with
   in such detail.”

 “I have appreciated the opportunity to take part in this Community Jury and have found the
   process interesting and instructive.”

 “An interesting process indicating the difficulties a Council faces when attempting to put a
   process in place to rectify the shortcomings of some State Govt. controls and services at the
   local level.”

 “Had we been able to request information directly from Council staff present, much of the time
   wasted going over and over discussing irrelevant information would have been eliminated.”

 “Personally I think the concept of a Community Jury is very progressive as long as it has a
   guided format. Although, as you know, I found some aspects of the process frustrating, I am
   still very happy to have participated.”

It was clear that five meetings were not sufficient for the second Noosa River Jury to conclude
effectively however the Jury elected to extend the final meeting by one hour rather than return for
a sixth meeting.

Council elected to, and nDF agreed to an additional meeting for a juror working group. This group
was happy with the opportunity provided and produced a supporting document to the Jury’s final
report that reflects the rationale behind the Jury’s set of recommendations.

4.    newDemocracy feedback

The Program Manager from newDemocracy Foundation provided the following feedback:

“The members of this Jury explored the issue very deeply, with their deliberations canvassing the
not inconsiderable nuances, issues and intricacies associated with this highly complex issue.




                                                                                     Page 16 of 50