Safety, resilience, accessibility priorities of council’s transport plans

So far, I have been to two of council’s public presentations re its Three-year-plan and have talked to 3 councillors regarding “$500,000 pencilled in for a city centre multi-modal gap analysis”. Two of the councillors, like many members of public, had no idea what “multi-modal gap” means and the third one was surprised with the amount of half a million dollars just for its analysis!
When the council clearly knows majority of our community is not in favour of its mode shift plans and that its plans are out of alignment with the Government's policy and that no more money will be coming from taxpayers’ coffers to support GDC’s fanciful plans - not requested, nor wanted by residents - why does it still want to waste $.5 million on this useless analysis?

It is rather disingenuous to say “The report ranked four priorities of public submissions in order.”, when the consultation itself gave those 4 choices for people to rank. Otherwise, hardly anyone would have mode-shift anywhere on their submissions. This woke idea originated from the council itself!

Still public have let council know. yet again, that they don’t want its mode shift plans (or the council’s efforts to reduce car use here).
Yet, the report seems in favour of carrying on with many aspects of mode shift plan, irrespective of community’s wishes.
What kind of weasel words are these? “The report recommended changes to the RLTP 'narrative' and evidence base around the economic benefits of investment, including active travel and public transport.” Is the change of narrative to deceive central government or residents here?
What is the point of public consultations, if council is determined to follow its own ideological pursuits in spite of the public’s wishes?
“It also recommended moving to a cashless ticket system in buses.”, based on what? Community’s request? Where did that recommendation come from? What is the justification for it?
PS. Thank you to Andrew Ashton/TGH for covering of this important issue from the beginning.