The Dunedin City Council yesterday asked the Internet-Mana party to remove these signs in Caversham Valley Rd. Photo by Craig Baxter.
Dunedin authorities have ordered that several election signs
be removed after they were put up in the wrong places.
But political parties say there could have been more
notification of changes ruling out some of the usual hoarding
The signs, on a boat shed on the Otago Peninsula, beside the
Caversham bypass work and at Quarry Rd, at the entrance to
Mosgiel, were expected to be removed without issue after
their owners were asked to take them down.
Otago Regional Council compliance manager Peter Kelliher said
the council asked for a sign to be removed from a boat shed
He was not aware which political party it belonged to, but
said general conditions in consents for boat sheds prevented
owners from erecting signs on their buildings, except in
cases where a specific consent was granted.
The political parties had otherwise been behaving well so
far, after the council experienced ''a few'' issues with
signs on boat sheds during the last local body elections, he
Dunedin City Council senior planner (monitoring and
compliance) Campbell Thomson said he became aware yesterday
of Internet Mana signs beside the Caversham bypass, a site
used previously for signs but unavailable this year because
of the roadworks going on there, and at Quarry Rd, where the
Green Party also installed a sign.
The council removed the site as a designated sign site
because of the limited space and presence of high-voltage
It appeared in both instances the people putting the signs up
had simply been unaware signs should no longer be erected at
those sites and all were co-operative when contacted, Mr
Internet Mana Dunedin campaign manager Alax Robinson said he
had not realised the sites were not allowed this year, as
they were still shown on the council's website, but would
remove the signs.
Green Party spokesman Brian Dixon said party staff had also
made ''an honest mistake'' and had taken the sign down.
It was ''unfortunate'' there was a discrepancy between what
the council said were legally permitted signage sites under
the district plan and its cautionary advice regarding issues
at some of the locations, he said.
The party's staff had tried to clarify the matter several
times and were repeatedly referred to the website, which was
confusing, he said.
''It is important the public are provided with accurate and
up-to-date information on such matters and that any necessary
precautions and safety issues are adequately highlighted.''
Mr Thomson said these were the first two incidents of signs
being erected in the wrong place this election period.
Although maps showing the no-longer-available sites remained
online until the council had officially reviewed its district
plan, they were accompanied by an advisory note outlining why
the sites could no longer be used for signs, he said.
People could erect signs in other spots if they successfully
applied for resource consent.
Signs inside buildings did not necessarily violate rules,
because they might not technically constitute ''signs'' as
defined in the council's district plan or electoral
regulations, he said.
Complaints would be considered case-by-case, he said.
Signs may be placed for six weeks before elections, and must
be removed by midnight the night before the election.