THE final decision on controversial hospital services will be made in public.
But the Examiner has uncovered moves which have led campaigners to criticise the decision- making process. The crucial meeting will be on March 22 at Huddersfield's the Galpharm Stadium.
But four health officials who will have key roles to play in the decisions will have two votes each. That adds up to a quarter of the 32 votes which will be given for either retaining or shifting services from Huddersfield Royal Infirmary.
The other votes will be cast by board members who have one vote each. They are clinical representatives and lay members.
Some maternity, gynaecological, children's and surgical services at HRI hang in the balance.
But the four executive directors of the two Huddersfield primary care trusts get to vote twice.
And Save Our NHS leader Dr Jackie Grunsell says that means the balance is already shifting towards an unfair defeat for her campaign.
"This is totally undemocratic," said the GP.
"I would presume these four people will vote the same way.
"That means a quarter of the vote has already gone."
Because joint chief executive Kevin Holder, director of finance Mark Day, director of public health Sohail Bhatti and director of corporate service Helena Corder are the heads of two boards they get two votes.
Dr Grunsell, 33, said: "These people are unaccountable and unelected, yet they get the chance to go against the public.
"There is so much we can learn from the unfair way this consultation has been managed.
"The fact the board members are not even elected or publicly accountable is incredible.
"They are paid by us and there for our service, yet we are unable to give them a vote of no confidence."
A conference room at the Galpharm Stadium will be the setting for the crunch meeting - and it is expected to be packed.
How each member of the boards vote will also be made public.
Times and specific details of exactly what will happen at the meeting have not yet been made, but campaigners have welcomed the news.
Dr Grunsell added: "The fact we will get to see which way people vote is good news - even if the vote is unfair.
"It is only right and proper that these things should be done in public, but I am outraged at how the vote will work.
"The fair and proper thing to do is for each of the four members to forfeit one of their votes. Why should they get more than anybody else?"
But health chiefs have ruled out any move on the votes.
A spokesman for the Huddersfield South and Central trusts said: "Statutory rules mean they have to have a vote on both boards because they are members of both boards."