Bainbridge Islanders have a lot to say — but remarkably little influence — when it comes to development on the island.

Sadly, history has shown that to be true.

Sure, some can note the extensive opportunities that islanders have had during the city’s ongoing rewrite of its comprehensive plan, the expansive policy document that will guide growth and development on the island over the next two decades.

But when the rubber hits the road — or more precisely, before the shovel hits the dirt — residents arguably have little chance to change or influence a development project for the better.

History has also shown that for all the input citizens have offered on Bainbridge’s comp plan, the real controls and limits on development are actually set in stone during the update of the city’s development regulations. It’s there where the height limits, landscaping requirements and other standards for development are set. The lesson of the Visconsi development is just the most recent painful reminder of what can be built under existing development rules.

Islanders have not been pleased with development that has occurred on Bainbridge, a point brought home during the recent citizen survey that showed just a 40 percent positive rating for development on the island.

In the months ahead, the city will take up the prospect of development of the city-owned Suzuki property.

Now comes a real chance — one of the best opportunities in years, we think — for Bainbridge residents to determine what happens on a significant undeveloped piece of property.

Views on how to develop the land, or not, run the gamut. How should the Suzuki property be developed? We say, let the public decide.

Four options are on the table — three that include extensive housing components which could offer affordable housing — but the city council is currently in control of what proposal may actually get the green light.

If city officials are genuine in wanting to develop further trust between city hall and its citizenry, however, it should put the development of the Suzuki property up for an advisory vote.

Put all of the options on the ballot, and let citizens decide the fate of the property.

The proponents for each development proposal will then have the chance to explain, and justify, why their approach is best to the entire community, rather than merely convince four of seven council members.