-Society members had been intimidated by council officials and Te Arawa activists.
-Their democratic rights to freedom of expression and association had been denied.
-Questions about democratic principles, values and rights don't get answered.
-The presentation of Option 5, the Democratic Governance Model, had been debarred "which has denied our democratic rights to information needed to make informed decisions".
Mr Macpherson said "Option 5" was a proposal put forward by the society after he claimed Rotorua Mayor Steve Chadwick and the council's strategy and partnerships group manager, Jean-Paul Gaston, promised members of the public that any other options would be considered as part of the public consultation process.
"We had a verbal guarantee from the mayor that any models from the public would be considered. That promise has been violated," he said.
But no record can be found of that promise being made.
Mr Gaston said a commitment was made to include in the statement of proposal the three other options the council had also considered.
"There has never been an 'option 5' in this process. However, Mr Macpherson, like all residents, is welcome to make a submission identifying his own option or particular preference."
Mr Gaston said people who genuinely wanted to find out about and understand the proposal would continue to attend information sessions so they could make up their own minds.
"Sadly, Mr Macpherson's comments show that he still misunderstands the purpose of our information meetings, although council personnel have attempted to carefully explain this to him on a number of occasions.
"The meetings weren't arranged as a vehicle for his society's campaign, or for promoting the views of any other group for that matter.
"Anyone who has attended one of the public information sessions to date will know that Mr Macpherson's accusation of intimidation by council officers is nonsense.
"On the contrary, attempts by some individuals to disrupt a number of the meetings to date, by constantly interrupting presenters, have made some members of the public and staff feel quite uncomfortable."
He said the council wanted to know what people thought through the submission process.
Society chairwoman and councillor Glenys Searancke said she would continue to attend meetings in her capacity as a councillor.
"After all, it is meant to be the council's consultation process. It is not a staff presentation, it should be the politicians' presentation, " she said.
Councillor Charles Sturt said the point of the meetings was to provide information and they were not meant as an opportunity to berate council staff or debate the pros and cons of the proposal.
"I never thought the process was created for any other option as they are not the ones council received and then agreed to consult on.
"Why don't people calm down, take a deep breath, and stop trying to use the open process to further their own political agendas or ambitions."
Mr Macpherson said the society had set up a number of its own information meetings where "we'll be explaining our democratic governance model that we have not been allowed any opportunity to present that at any of these meetings".
The first meeting is next Thursday.
