Kristian Horvath - Community Advocate

Submitted by: Kristian Horvath - Community advocate
July 2025

Summary of recommendations

1. The Sorell Council move towards a collaborative model of engagement.
2. Incorporate Key Elements of Collaboration into the Community Engagement Strategy. To embed meaningful collaboration, Council could:
   • Involve community members early in the process
     
   • Invite community representatives to attend meetings that would typically occur behind closed doors to provide real insight into decision-making
     
   • Establish clear feedback loops after decisions are made, outlining how community input was considered
     
   • Transparently explain the constraints and reasoning behind final outcomes
     
   • Report openly on what was heard during consultation and how it shaped the final direction
3. Council should prioritise plain language in all consultation materials and clearly explain the purpose, scope, and expected outcomes. Where possible, draft documents should be tested with community advisory groups before public release.
4. Council should include a clear section on project constraints in all community engagement materials and communications. This should outline known limitations (e.g. budget, timelines, land use restrictions) in plain language to help residents make informed contributions and foster realistic expectations.
5. Council could expand communication channels by:
   • Collaborate with volunteers to deliver flyers to letterboxes who are part of a community advisory committee
   • Encouraging community members to share updates on social media
   • Placing flyer stands in local businesses, schools, and neighbourhood houses
6. Set a minimum engagement target of 10% of affected residents for each project or strategy.
7. Develop standard engagement metrics to be reported for every major project. These could include:
   • Number of responses from surveys and their source (e.g. online, website etc)
   • Number of workshops or pop-ups held
     
   • Number of stakeholder meetings conducted
     
   • Timing and accessibility of events
     
   • Communication channels used and responses received from each channel
8. Create a continuous improvement framework where each engagement process is reviewed for “what worked” and “lessons learned.”
9. Publish engagement metrics and lessons learned on the Council website to ensure transparency and accountability.
10. Ensure every Council strategy includes specific and measurable objectives. Actions arising from these strategies should be tracked over time.
11. Council should report annually on each strategy’s progress, including achievements, challenges, and any updates or changes.
12. Ensure that strategy actions and progress updates are accessible online in an easy-to-navigate format, rather than hidden within lengthy PDF documents.

Introduction

Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the review of the Sorell Council’s Draft Communication and Engagement Strategy. As an active community member with a strong interest in local engagement, I would like to share a vision for more inclusive, transparent, and collaborative consultation practices in the Sorell municipality. This submission is based on my lived experience, grassroots community work, and reflections on recent Council consultations.

Acknowledging Council’s Progress 

Before sharing suggestions for improvement, I would like to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of Sorell Council staff and Councillors. Community engagement takes time, commitment, and often occurs behind the scenes and the efforts of the Sorell council staff is very much appreciated. The recent appointment of a dedicated Community Development Officer is a major step forward, signalling a genuine commitment to strengthening relationships with the community. I would also like to commend the Park Beach to Cafes Community Collaboration Project. Although I was not personally involved, the information I’ve read online suggests this was a strong and positive example of community collaboration, with genuine interest shown by both the Council and residents.

Current political environment

Any effort to engage with the community will inevitably encounter residents who feel a long-standing sense of exclusion from decisions made by Council, state, and federal governments. This history of feeling unheard or overlooked can create an immediate barrier to future community collaboration. Many residents may already feel disillusioned or believe their input will be ignored or dismissed. However, I genuinely believe these barriers can be overcome. 

Residents’ input must be at the heart of all Council decision-making.

For community engagement to be effective, residents need to feel genuinely heard and trust that their views will be taken into account. 

If not, fewer people will participate in any Council consultation or engagement initiatives — and negative feelings about local councils and governments will grow. When residents feel heard and see their contributions reflected in decisions, the benefits are clear: stronger collaboration, greater participation, improved outcomes for the community and a better overall relationship with Council (including fewer frustrated phone calls to Council staff). Later in this submission, I’ll explain why it’s so important to clearly communicate the limitations or challenges around any proposals to help build and maintain trust.

Consultation versus Collaboration

Consultation and collaboration are both methods of community engagement, but they differ in depth and intent. 

Consultation involves informing the community and gathering feedback, while the final decisions remain with the Council. In contrast, collaboration treats community members as equal partners in decision-making, working together to co-create solutions [1]. Though collaboration requires a little more time and resources, it creates better outcomes for residents and builds trust between Council and ratepayers. Collaboration not only ensures that all voices are heard but the community is an active participant in changes that impact them. I believe that the Council can do this in a way that is effective and resource efficient which I will explain in detail below

Sorell Council Consultation Data

The best measure we currently have for community engagement is the number of survey participants and the number of residents who attend public meetings or events. A common response from local governments is that engagement also occurs through informal conversations at community events or in day-to-day interactions—including during personal time. While these informal touchpoints are valuable, they cannot replace structured, unbiased and transparent engagement processes.

Community input must be collected through consistent and deliberate methods to minimise bias and ensure that all voices are heard across different demographics and community circles. I will discuss community collaboration benchmarks in a later section below. 

See below a list of recent community consultations led by the Sorell Council and the number of community members that engaged in each consultation. Note: The response data was collected from what was available online or through previous contact with Council. There are other community engagements projects which are not listed here. 

Although the above data is only what has been able to be collected thus far, it shows a considerable variation of community responses. The 2021 Waste Management Survey recorded an excellent response rate (approx 9% of the voting population) while the social strategy received responses from 1.5% of the voting population. 

From Top-Down Consultation to Collaborative Decision-Making

Traditionally, consultation has operated in a top-down model—where decisions are made behind closed doors and input is sought only at limited stages. While this model may seem efficient, it often misses the opportunity to harness the knowledge, passion, and creativity of the local community.

Collaboration, rather than consultation, with the community consistently leads to better outcomes for residents.

Recommendation 1. The Sorell Council move towards a collaborative model of engagement.

The level of engagement and collaboration should vary depending on the scale and impact of a project. For major investments or municipality-wide initiatives, the Council could establish Community Engagement Advisory Committees. These committees could:

• Be invited to attend relevant decision-making meetings and provide input where appropriate
  
• Assist in shaping the engagement strategy for the project
  
• Help keep the broader community informed—for example, by posting in local community groups or sharing updates through their personal networks
  
• Support community engagement activities such as distributing flyers, putting up posters, encouraging newsletter sign-ups, or amplifying the Council messages on social media
  

Committee members would be selected through an open application process, with a focus on ensuring diverse representation across age, demographics, and geography. Council should provide a clear position description outlining expectations, with flexibility built in to encourage participation from working people, carers, and parents.

While this approach may require the Council to relinquish some control over the process, the long-term benefits include more informed decision-making, improved community outcomes, and a stronger relationship between the Council and residents.

An example of how this collaborative model can be scaled depending on the project is provided below.

What Does Effective Community Collaboration Look Like?

Effective community collaboration goes beyond consultation. It involves inviting residents into the decision-making process from the outset—not just seeking feedback after key choices have already been made.

Recommendation 2: Incorporate Key Elements of Collaboration into the Community Engagement Strategy. To embed meaningful collaboration, Council could:

• Involve community members early in the process
  
• Invite community representatives to attend meetings that would typically occur behind closed doors to provide real insight into decision-making
  
• Establish clear feedback loops after decisions are made, outlining how community input was considered
  
• Transparently explain the constraints and reasoning behind final outcomes
  
• Report openly on what was heard during consultation and how it shaped the final direction
  

Without these practices, residents may feel their voices are being ignored, or worse—that the Council is uninterested in their opinions. This can lead to disengagement and growing mistrust.

Clear Language and Accessible Communication

Some Council consultation materials use terminology that may be unclear or unfamiliar to the broader public—for example, “social strategy” or “active transport strategy.” If language isn’t accessible, it becomes a barrier for residents to meaningfully participate. This may help explain the relatively low response rate to the social strategy engagement, as compared to other projects. A community advisory committee could play a key role in reviewing language and ensuring communications are clear, inclusive, and easily understood by the wider community.

Recommendation 3: Council should prioritise plain language in all consultation materials and clearly explain the purpose, scope, and expected outcomes. Where possible, draft documents should be tested with community advisory groups before public release.

Communicate constraints of any projects

It’s essential that Council clearly communicates the constraints of any proposed project—whether financial, logistical, or regulatory—so that residents have a realistic understanding of what is possible. As a small council with limited resources, Sorell simply cannot deliver the most expensive or ideal option in every case. There may be a fear that by being transparent about these limitations, Council risks disappointing the community or appearing to say "no" to what people want. However, the opposite is often true: when residents understand the full picture—including budget limitations, competing priorities, and funding timelines—they are more likely to offer practical ideas, show empathy for difficult choices, and support decisions even when their preferred option isn’t selected. Transparency about constraints builds trust, manages expectations, and helps create shared ownership of outcomes.

Recommendation 4: Council should include a clear section on project constraints in all community engagement materials and communications. This should outline known limitations (e.g. budget, timelines, land use restrictions) in plain language to help residents make informed contributions and foster realistic expectations.

Delivery Methods and Inclusivity

Relying on Facebook, email lists, and the annual rates notice newsletter significantly limits the reach of engagement efforts. Many residents are not active on social media, and tenants/renters do not receive rate notices. While digital channels are important, a wider communication approach is needed.

Recommendation 5: Council could expand communication channels by:

• Collaborate with volunteers to deliver flyers to letterboxes who are part of a community advisory committee
• Encouraging community members to share updates on social media
• Placing flyer stands in local businesses, schools, and neighbourhood houses
  

These alternative methods are more effective when residents feel their contributions are genuinely valued and influence real decisions.

Setting Minimum Benchmarks for Engagement

To ensure representative and inclusive engagement, the Council’s strategy should outline clear participation benchmarks.

Recommendation 6: Set a minimum engagement target of 10% of affected residents for each project or strategy.

• For municipality-wide engagement (~13,000 voters), this would equate to 1,300 responses
  
• Ensure rural and urban representation is proportionally considered
  

Measuring Standard Benchmarks for each Engagement Project

To improve engagement outcomes over time, Council must consistently track and evaluate its efforts.

Recommendation 7: Develop standard engagement metrics to be reported for every major project. These could include:

• Number of responses from surveys and their source (e.g. online, website etc)
• Number of workshops or pop-ups held
  
• Number of stakeholder meetings conducted
  
• Timing and accessibility of events
  
• Communication channels used and responses received from each channel

Recommendation 8: Create a continuous improvement framework where each engagement process is reviewed for “what worked” and “lessons learned.”

Recommendation 9: Publish engagement metrics and lessons learned on the Council website to ensure transparency and accountability.

Clear, Specific, and Measurable Goals 

All strategies should be underpinned by clear, measurable goals to enable accountability and track progress.

Recommendation 10: Ensure every Council strategy includes specific and measurable objectives. Actions arising from these strategies should be tracked over time.

Recommendation 11: Council should report annually on each strategy’s progress, including achievements, challenges, and any updates or changes.

Recommendation 12: Ensure that strategy actions and progress updates are accessible online in an easy-to-navigate format, rather than hidden within lengthy PDF documents.

Trust, Transparency, and Long-Term Engagement 

At its core, community engagement is about trust. When residents believe their voices are genuinely heard and that decisions are made transparently, participation increases. This builds stronger relationships between Council and the community and brings long-term benefits such as:

• Increased engagement and higher response rates
  
• Better quality feedback and more informed decisions
  
• Fewer frustrated calls to Council staff, easing service pressure
  

Sorell Council as a Leader in Community Collaboration

Sorell Council has an opportunity to position itself as a state leader in community collaboration—setting an example for other Councils across Tasmania.

By embracing transparency and partnering with residents from the outset, Sorell can inspire a new standard for local governance.

Final thoughts 

This isn’t about radically reimagining community engagement—it’s about committing to a culture of openness, collaboration, and continuous improvement. By working alongside residents in a genuine way, Sorell Council can become a model for local engagement.

I commend the progress made so far, especially the appointment of a dedicated Community Engagement Officer. This is a strong step forward. I encourage the Council to build on this foundation by embedding the principles of building trust, transparency, and collaboration into its ongoing strategy.

Thank you for considering this submission.

References

[1] https://communityimpacthub.wa.gov.au/learn-from-others/insights/101-community-collaboration-the-glue-that-makes-change-sticky/#:~:text=Community%20consultation%20and%20community%20collaboration%20are%20both,but%20they%20have%20different%20approaches%20and%20goals.&text=While%20consultation%20is%20key%20to%20gathering%20data,community%20to%20work%20towards%20a%20common%20goal.