No, I’m proposing that the EC gives added weight to LGA boundaries as they stand currently or as are redrawn with community support. There were changes that have been forced from the top down, or the bottom up that go counter to your assertion in the Camden area e.g. the division of Macarthur excised Camden, the LGA was also extended further to the north outside of historical boundaries at the behest of the council and the state government, in both examples there was very vocal concern about these moves and they were carried over anyway. Little changed with the first preference votes in both districts.
I’d also cite the council merger process in NSW as an example of how not to go about this process. The support initially for amalgamation was high in many LGAs but fell through the floor when the public discovered that their submissions and input would barely be paid lip service, let alone have any influence on the project.
When community has a voice and that voice is heard, they’re more likely to react positively to the change as the polling for amalgamation support at the beginning would point towards.
If that was a concern that it could lead to a negative outcome, that could also be somewhat mitigated by having states split between local and state elections, but personally I don’t really see any issues with that.
Yeah that’s the crux of it that I see, if the population density is low you’re going to end up with large seats or less MPs for your seat. If there was some sort of mathematical model that could be applied to strike a balance, that would make multimember an easier sell.