I’m a member of the Waipapa/Papanui-Innes Community Board (and am standing for re-election this year) but made this submission on my own behalf. The Community Board has no role in decision-making on the area.
In the interests of transparency my submission follows:
Q: Should the Council: invest an additional up to $150 million to enable the project to continue as planned; stop the project altogether; or pause and re-evaluate the project? A: Pause and re-evaluate the project
Q: What would you like to see us re-evaluate? A: The scope, the funding model, the operating model, the business case, the climate impact.
Q: Do you have any further comments regarding the funding of Te Kaha – Multi-Use Arena? A: General comment: I am not against arenas. What I am against is spending more than what is needed on them. Just because the Government has given us money towards the cost of an arena, we shouldn’t waste money on an over-the-top design. After all, we as taxpayers are contributing to the Government’s portion of this project, as well as our ratepayer portion. As inflation bites on these projects, we have to be more frugal to make our hard-earned money go further. $500,000 a week for the next thirty years to finance the build? And then it’ll run at a loss of millions of dollars a year? And despite our climate & ecological emergency there’s been no consideration in the budget or business case of the climate impact of building and operating the venue?
Opinion: Consultation closed yesterday on the Christchurch City Council’s draft Integrated Water Strategy. This Strategy is described as setting a framework to help the Council manage water supply, wastewater, & stormwater, and also water infrastructure, waterways, and coastal waters. It’s a Strategy that relates to $10 billion in Council spending and a 100-year view.
Sounds important, right? Especially when water is something that impacts every member of the community, and people will march in the street over issues like water bottling? I attended two of the Council’s drop-in information sessions on the draft Strategy (and viewed the sign-in sheet for the others), and am sad to say there was a near-zero attendance by members of the public. Most sessions have had one or two people sign in. Why are so few people turning out? Continue reading “Why the low public response to Water Strategy consultation?”
At the start of this week I submitted feedback to Council on the draft Christchurch Northern Corridor (CNC) Downstream Effects Mitigation Plan. The draft plan is no longer open for feedback – I left my response to pretty much the last minute as I’d been waiting on information from the NZ Transport Agency regarding the benefits of the project.