Shifting from the Flip-Flop to a Solid Facts Based Engagement for Decisions

Thunder Bay – POLITICS – The debate and debacle of the decision on a homeless encampment in the City of Thunder Bay laid bare the gap between several councillors, city administration, and the citizens of our city.

The Miles Street site had been rejected by Council months ago. Then the site beside the Thunder Centre along the river was proposed and failed. Then it was the Current River site that was proposed and failed. The Kam River site with its obvious and known requirements for the railway to sign off was doomed to fail but was proposed.

That left Administration jumping back to Miles Street. Overwhelmingly that send the message that the engagement with the residents, the Fort William BIA and local businesses that had been done, was simply being ignored.

Rather than simply focus on the issue of the site for a homeless encampment, what that entire process was a clear indication of was a complete failure of City Administration to engage and then abide by the input from residents, and additionally decisions by Council.

Moving to a Better Process for Decision Making

As Thunder Bay continues to evolve, the effectiveness of its municipal decision-making relies increasingly on a healthy relationship between two key pillars of governance: City Administration and the community it serves.

Over the term of the past several councils, it is increasingly apparent that there needs to be more training on what the role of a city councillor is to be in our city.

Critics claim that it is the voters fault, and that at the end of the debate is really the absolute truth. When voters select council at the polls based as much on name recognition, rather than on ideas and platforms, we have seen councillors sitting at the table in some cases for so long that they start thinking they know better than the voters.

The reality is at the core of how our city will succeed is finding a true balance – There are times when a mass of citizens without enough facts will stampede toward poor decisions.

Thunder Bay City Council sits at the nexus of these two forces, responsible for synthesizing detailed administrative reports with the lived experiences and values of local residents.

Done well, this balance ensures that policy is both well-informed and publicly supported — a vital ingredient for a resilient, forward-looking city.

Right now due in part to a poor means of community engagement, many people are simply writing off this council and have taken to calling down city council as a group as incompetent.

Understanding the Players: Council, Administration, and the Public

City Administration provides the technical backbone of local governance. Consultant and staff reports cover a wide array of topics — from infrastructure and budgeting to zoning and environmental compliance.

These reports are crafted by professionals using data, legislation, and best practices to provide evidence-based recommendations to Council.

On the other side, the public brings essential lived experience, community values, and democratic legitimacy.

Whether it’s concerns about neighbourhood safety, affordable housing, or Indigenous relations, citizens offer perspectives that raw data alone cannot capture.

One of the failings in municipal politics is that when long-time Councillors retire, or are defeated, their years of wisdom is uprooted from the council.

The Disconnect: When Public Sentiment and Reports Diverge

Thunder Bay, like many Canadian cities, has faced moments when community concerns appeared to be sidelined by technical reasoning. For example, decisions on shelter locations or infrastructure projects can spark public frustration if residents feel their input wasn’t genuinely considered.

The result is a trust gap — a common issue in municipalities across the country.

A key challenge is that administrative reports, while robust, often lack the narrative or emotional connection that community voices bring.

Conversely, public feedback can lack the technical feasibility assessments that staff are trained to provide. The trick is to create a governance model that respects and blends both.

Five Ways to Better Integrate Public Engagement with Administrative Reports

1. Build Public Consultations into the Report Lifecycle

Instead of gathering feedback after a draft plan is produced, make engagement an input to the report itself. For example, if the city is preparing a new housing strategy, host workshops and online surveys before staff prepare their recommendations. Respecting the people should be ranked far higher in the process.

2. Use Plain Language Summaries

Thunder Bay residents often cite dense language and technical jargon as barriers to participation. Providing executive summaries of reports in plain English — with infographics where possible — can help residents make informed comments. It might sound insulting, but the usual format for a news article is to be written at a grade 8-10 level.

3. Create ‘Citizen Briefs’ for Council Meetings

Alongside administrative reports, Council could request a compiled summary of community input related to the topic at hand. These briefs would reflect both organized public feedback (such as from town halls or deputations) and digital submissions. Thunder Bay could be doing this more formally.

4. Implement Participatory Decision-Making Models

Cities like Guelph and Victoria have piloted participatory budgeting or citizens’ assemblies — mechanisms that embed the public directly into decision-making. Thunder Bay could explore similar models, particularly for neighbourhood-specific issues like transit routes or park improvements.

5. Hold Feedback Forums Post-Decision

One overlooked step is the feedback loop. Explaining how public input influenced — or didn’t influence — final decisions helps build trust. Whether in council recaps or newsletters, this transparency shows that community voices matter, even when decisions are complex.

6. Explore Real Structural Change to Council

Right now Thunder Bay’s Council is 12 Councillors and a Mayor. The Mayor is the only full-time paid person. Perhaps a seven person council with all the Councillors working full-time and with offices at City Hall should be explored.

Real-World Example: Hamilton’s Participatory Planning for Homelessness

Hamilton, Ontario offers a compelling case study. As it tackled a homelessness strategy, the city blended staff reports with extensive community engagement, including voices from those with lived experience. The final recommendations reflected both fiscal realities and the compassion-driven demands of residents. Thunder Bay, facing similar challenges, could have draw lessons from this balanced, consultative model.

A Roadmap for Thunder Bay

Thunder Bay City Council is uniquely positioned to champion this blend of evidence-based governance and responsive democracy.

With ongoing challenges in economic development, public safety, housing, and reconciliation with Indigenous communities, a robust model of engagement should be the cornerstone of stronger public policy.

By designing a decision-making process that starts with the public, respects administrative expertise, and communicates outcomes clearly, Council can not only make better decisions — Council can start to rebuild public trust in local democracy.