While the outcome of the initiative would be publicly reported, the council said it was keeping the names of assembly members confidential.
It fears publication of members’ names would “likely discourage” future participation.
“Anonymity allows participants to engage fully, particularly if they wish to offer personal opinions or are involved in controversial topics,” the council’s chief strategy officer, Sarah O’Hagan, said.
The chosen 40 will gather for up to five closed-door sessions, meeting for the first time on Tuesday night at the city’s War Memorial Centre.
The meetings will not be livestreamed.
The council said it was “formally withholding” the names of the participants to protect them from improper pressure or harassment.
“While the citizens’ assembly is under way, we want to provide an environment where the group is free to have discussions without scrutiny on individuals or external pressure,” O’Hagan said.
“With this in mind, we have not published the names of individuals selected for the assembly.
“One of the reasons for this is we want to consider using this participatory approach in the future.”
Local Democracy Reporting’s routine request for the names was treated by the council as a request under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
The council said the names were being withheld to protect the privacy of individuals and to protect “members, officers, employees and persons from improper pressure or harassment”.
“The council does not consider there to be any public interest that outweighs the need to protect individuals’ privacy and maintain the effective conduct of public affairs,” O’Hagan said.
O’Hagan said after each facilitated session, the meeting run-sheet and high-level minutes would be published on the council website and social media, summarising the process and conversation without identifying individuals.
“In this way, the community can keep up-to-date with what’s being discussed at the assembly.
“It’s … really important to us to keep the wider community informed of the group’s progress.”
Representatives of the citizens’ assembly will present the group’s recommendation on the future of outdoor pools to elected members at a livestreamed council meeting in late June.
“This is open to everyone to watch, as is the meeting where elected members consider the recommendation and make their decision. We’d encourage anyone who’s interested to tune into these livestreamed meetings,” O’Hagan said.
“Once the assembly has concluded, photos and video of the process showing the people involved will be produced.”
Whanganui Mayor Andrew Tripe said he asked for the citizens’ assembly to be investigated in August last year as part of “taking council to the people”.
He had since delegated the process to the chief executive and his team.
However, he said there was a fine balance between protecting privacy and being transparent.
“The unintended consequences and risks of providing the names of participants to the wider community comes with significant risk – e.g. criticism on social media, blame for any recommendation they make,” Tripe said.
“Being able to participate in the process unencumbered will mean a better process and – if we agree to undertake the process again – will ensure that other participants step up.
“Obviously the outcome of the process is a recommendation to council and that will be publicly available.”
Tripe said he was excited with the direction the citizens’ assembly was taking.
“An aquatic review is an excellent choice to trial this process,” Tripe said.
“I thank all those who have put their hand up and I very much hope that it is an effective forum to provide direction on decision-making.”
The citizens’ assembly is based on a concept of participatory democracy originating in ancient Rome.
Chief executive David Langford said earlier this year assemblies had been successful around the world because they brought together a diverse range of voices and allowed participants time to explore an issue in depth.
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
