Submission
9 year plan feedback
Should we remove 231 Stuart Street (formerly the Fortune Theatre) from the list of strategic assets in the DCC Significance and Engagement policy?
No, keep 231 Stuart Street as a strategic asset
Do you have any comments about 231 Stuart Street?
Should we charge an entry fee of $20 (incl. GST) for international visitors aged 16 and over, at Toitū and Dunedin Public Art Gallery?
No, do not introduce an entry fee of $20 (incl. GST)
Do you have any comments about the entry fee for international visitors?
Is there anything else you would like to tell us?
- Put the rainbow crossings for Bath St back in to the project: the Council desperately needs to show leadership on creating expectations that queer community members are safe in this city. There has been a notable rise of hate speech and hateful behaviour in our community, so delivering the rainbow crossings -- which also merge beautiful environmental and mana whenua elements -- is the absolute least you can do to show the city hate won't be tolerated here. It's about more than money!;
- Finish the cycleway connections, particularly in the inner city;
- Continue work to make South Dunedin climate resilient (stop allowing intensification in South D by approving multi-unit development, you're making the situation worse!);
- Honour the commitment to a new, purpose-built performing arts venue: if for no other reason, that almost none of Dunedin's grassroots performing arts venues are accessible, which is a justice issue;
- Be ambitious about where the city can go: better fund the things that attract people, such as arts, culture and creativity (for it's own sake, not just to attract tourists -- the people of Ōtepoti deserve nice things too!), and ensure more funds go to the organisations that deliver programming and services, not just DCC departments;
- Advocate harder for resources to be awarded to the south of the South: better airline connectivity and affordability (without which business, tourism and cultural activities are stymied in the area), increased national funding for community organisations, etc. The South's potential is being constrained by lack of resources;
- To my top point, in a country that is already imitating rhetoric from right-wing extremist governments from around the world in both political and social forums, our Council's need to fund the things that work to counteract divisive, hateful, violent behaviour: programmes and spaces that bring people together to connect, share experiences and collaborate. Neo-liberalism's long, long, loooooooong campaign of disinvesting in the things that connect communities on a human level are evident in the rise of misogynist, racist, authoritarian, fascist viewpoints locally, nationally and internationally: you need to do something before it's too late;
- Keeping rates artificially low over many years has been an irresponsible approach that means future residents will be saddled with paying for upgrading failing infrastructure that should have been paid for in the decades before: you need to avoid the same trap while understanding that there's more to a community than roads, waste and water, and the things that make life worth living should not be cut because of the failures of politicians;
- Councillors should not bully their constituents or reveal private information about them in a public forum.
Local Water Done Well feedback
Which water services delivery model do you support?
The Council’s preferred option: an in-house delivery model
Why did you choose this option?
Do you have any other feedback related to the proposed water services delivery models?
Supporting information
No associated documents with this submission.
Submitter
Submission id number: 1131840
Submitter name:
Ruth Harvey
Organisation