Seems to me public review is a failsafe - an acknowledgement that laws and regs can't always keep up with real life harms.

Public review in practice is a mechanism for concentrated local interest groups that don't have enough democratic legitimacy to win at the ballot box to instead win via a series of Tuesday night meetings normal people don't go to. There's literature on this: public comment overwhelmingly trends negative. People show up to prevent change. They rarely show up to support it, even if they do support it; normal people feel, reasonably, that their civic responsibility is to vote in actual elections for the policy they support, not to spend their life in City Hall jawboning.

You can't give all citizens effective veto power and then expect it will only be used for good in cases where the law is behind.