Displaying
361 - 370 of
438
| Number | Name | Submission | Change type | View |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S13-005 | Pauline Dicker | Objection | Boundary | |
Pauline DickerObjection
Dunedin North
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Pauline DickerThe removal of the Peninsula area from Dunedin South and transferred to Dunedin North.The Otago Peninsula area is geographically attached to Dunedin South not Dunedin North. People from the Peninsula shop and do business in this South Dunedin area. To move 8000 people may look like an easy solution to increasing populations but does not take into account the established community of interest. Personally I do not cross town into Dunedin North, whose population includes a transient student population, which has their own specific areas of interest, versus the established communities in the current Dunedin South electorate. To me it is reminiscent of the proposal of a few years ago to move the Chatham Islands from the Rongotai electorate - it was an exercise in numbers versus the relationships that the community sustains. Suggested solutionLeave the Peninsular in Dunedin South by stopping the move further south of this electorate. |
||||
| S13-006 | Janet Ray | Objection | Boundary | |
Janet RayObjection
Dunedin North
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Janet RayAs a resident of the Otago Peninsula I object to the proposed change to Dunedin North electorate. There is a strong connection to South Dunedin. It is our major shopping area, we have to travel through it to get anywhere and we are more aligned with it than the Dunedin North electorate as we have a similar population demographic and little in common with the NOrth.Suggested solutionLeave it in Dunedin South. |
||||
| S13-007 | Mr and Mrs Paul and Natalie Karaitiana | Objection | Boundary | |
Mr and Mrs Paul and Natalie KaraitianaObjection
Dunedin North
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mr and Mrs Paul and Natalie Karaitianawhile we are Te Tai Tonga and understand Dunedin North is below quota we object to Dunedin South including Otago Peninsula being moved into D/Nth electorate.it is difficult enough receiving budgetary consideration regarding issues that affect Otago Peninsula already without being 'relegated further afield to an electorate with no interest in OP. plus we already put up being served by city people that reply with 'where's that?' Suggested solutionuse some other electorate to top up D/Nth |
||||
| S13-008 | Board of Trustees of Grant's Braes School | Objection | Boundary | |
Board of Trustees of Grant's Braes SchoolObjection
Dunedin North
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Board of Trustees of Grant's Braes SchoolI am writing on behalf of our board of trustees to strongly object to the draft proposal to change the boundaries demarcating Dunedin South and Dunedin North.Our school is located on Larnach Road in Waverley, Dunedin South. As indicated in the draft proposal, if the electoral boundaries were altered, we would become part of Dunedin North. From a geographical and community perspective we find this proposal perplexing and nonsensical. The majority of our Year 6 children transition to Tahuna Normal Intermediate (for Years 7-8), and then many will continue on to other local high schools such as Bayfield, Queen's and King's. If the change to the electoral boundaries went ahead, our neighbouring schools would effectively be in a different part of Dunedin. Schools in Dunedin South also have a strong and longstanding connection with Otākou Marae on the Otago Peninsula, and by changing boundaries, Dunedin South would no longer have a marae in its electorate. We feel that a city can not be divided by a line on a map, but instead consideration is required of the amenities, schools, and community facilities that people in Dunedin South currently access, and most importantly what best serves the people in this area. We consider that there is no compelling reason to shift the established existing electoral boundaries, and again voice our opposition against the draft proposal which would effectively isolate the Otago Peninsula from Dunedin South. |
||||
| S13-009 | Mr Dominic Tay | Objection | Boundary, name | |
Mr Dominic TayObjection
Dunedin North
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change
Mr Dominic TayI support the realignment of the northern boundary of Dunedin North to the Dunedin City Council area but object to the realignment of the southern boundary as proposed.I disagree that the Otago Peninsula shares a stronger community of interest with northern Dunedin than with southern Dunedin. Communities particularly at the southern end of the peninsula, such as Waverley and Shiel Hill, are more closely connected with communities such as Andersons Bay, Musselburgh, and Tainui. However, I agree that Dunedin North needs to gain population and that transferring the Otago Peninsula is the easiest way to add to the existing electorate. While Dunedin North as proposed is slightly above quota, I notice that its population is expected to decline slightly in 2023, which may make further growth to this electorate in 2020 more palatable. I also believe the name of the electorate is no longer suitable as it takes in more than just the northern area of Dunedin. Suggested solutionI recommend realigning the boundary between Dunedin North and Dunedin South such that Dunedin North takes in more of the south Dunedin area, including the suburbs of Musselburgh, Andersons Bay and Tainui. This would maintain these communities of interest in the one electorate.With or without my proposed changes, I believe the name of the electorate is no longer suitable. I propose this be changed to 'Dunedin' (preferred), 'Dunedin Central' or 'Ōtepoti'. |
||||
| S13-601 | George Dawes | Counter-Objection | Boundary, name | |
George DawesCounter-Objection
Dunedin North
Relates to objectionsS13-001, S13-002, S13-004, S13-005, S13-006
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change
George DawesI support the boundary recommendation for Dunedin North by the Commission. The historic North/South divide through the city has split an urban centre across two electorates where it would be better served as a single electorate.I support the inclusion of the Otago Peninsula in Dunedin North because its community of interest is inextricably linked with Dunedin. There are a great many tourists attraction on the Otago Peninsula, and the tourism gateway to the city is Port Chalmers, on the other side of the harbour. There is a great deal of business activity between both sides of the harbour. Recently a ferry service between Careys Bay and Portobello has been established, strengthening the links across the harbour communities. Suggested solutionI recommend that Dunedin be centralised into a single Dunedin central seat. This would most successfully reflect the urban and university-based community of interest of Dunedin, while reflecting the rural and farming-based community of interest of Dunedin South (Taieri).I recommend that the electorate is named Dunedin Central. |
||||
| S13-602 | Joshua Hardy | Counter-Objection | Boundary | |
Joshua HardyCounter-Objection
Dunedin North
Relates to objectionsS13-001, S13-005
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Joshua HardyI personally support the idea of making the Otago Peninsula apart of the Dunedin North electorate as it supports the shift of the electorate to focusing on the urban/university based communities of interest within the Dunedin Region.This idea is supported by the proposed boundary change making the more rural areas to the north of Dunedin a part of the more rurally focused Waitaki Electorate. With the Otago peninsula becoming a more urban area with recent development, it would make sense for it to be a part of a Dunedin electorate and have an MP that is focused on the issues that affects the urban population especially one that has a very well established university-based community like that of Dunedin North. The Otago Peninsula population would benefit greatly from an MP that is more focused on the issues that would have an effect on their urban community. With the proposed Dunedin South boundaries looking to extend further into the rural communities of Milton and Balclutha, Dunedin South looks to become more rurally focused than it already currently is. Therefore it would be best to centralise the interests of urban Dunedin into a single central Dunedin seat which includes that of the Otago Peninsula. Suggested solutionI would recommend that Dunedin centralises and concentrates as a single Dunedin Central seat to focus on the urban issues that affect large community of interest in that area |
||||
| S13-603 | Mr Michael Bird | Counter-Objection | Boundary, name | |
Mr Michael BirdCounter-Objection
Dunedin North
Relates to objectionsS13-001, S13-002, S13-004, S13-005, S13-006
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change
Mr Michael BirdI support the boundary recommendation for Dunedin North by the Commission.I support the inclusion of the Otago Peninsula in Dunedin North because its community of interest is inextricably linked with Dunedin. The tourism areas of Dunedin are linked with a Ferry between Port Chalmers and the Peninsula. To say they are not connected by Communities of Interest is incorrect. I believe that Dunedin should have a centralised single Dunedin Central seat, similar to those in Christchurch, Auckland and Wellington. This would most successfully reflect the urban and university-based community of interest of Dunedin, while reflecting the rural and farming-based community of interest of Dunedin South (Taieri). Suggested solutionName change the electorate to Dunedin CentralMaintain the current boundary changes proposed by the Commission |
||||
| S13-604 | Susan Nash | Counter-Objection | Boundary, name | |
Susan NashCounter-Objection
Dunedin North
Relates to objectionsS13-001, S13-002, S13-004, S13-005, S13-006
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change
Susan NashI support the boundary recommendation for Dunedin North by the Commission. When you look at the number of people in the electorates in the South Island it is clear that growth means change needs to happen. Some people don't like change, and many of the objections were simply this. As population continues to grow it is sensible to make boundary changes that should create room for continued growth.The Peninsula being in the Dunedin North (Central) electorate is a natural part of change, the communities of interest exist in many areas including tourism and conservation efforts. Wellington Central, Auckland Central and Christchurch Central all exist. Dunedin should be the same. Suggested solutionKeep the current boundary changes proposed by the Commission, no changes necessary.Change the name of the electorate to Dunedin Central |
||||
| S14-001 | Evan Williams | Objection | Boundary | |
Evan WilliamsObjection
Dunedin South
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Evan Williamsboundary changes will give Dunedin city council undue influance over the clutha district council which aligns very well with southland dcc is financialy stressed cdc is in strong position. in the event a merger of councils tthe future of south otago and balclutha will be compromised.this has mooted in the past southland is the only option for cdc the boundary change would push towards dccSuggested solutiondo not change boundarys |
||||