Councillors at yesterday's Dunedin City Council meeting were being asked to rescind their support for the investigation for a second time, after an earlier vote was found not to comply with standing orders.
Cr Lee Vandervis - who pushed for the investigation in 2017 - had also been blocked from speaking at the meeting earlier this month, prompting him to quit that meeting.
Tempers soon flared again yesterday as Cr Vandervis tried to grill council chief executive Sue Bidrose about her decision to deprioritise the work.
Mr Cull blocked some of his questions, deeming they had already been answered, prompting Cr Vandervis to declare the Mayor's actions "ultra vires''.
Dr Bidrose answered others, explaining her decision was due in part to staff workloads.
They got busy working on the city's Provincial Growth Fund bids and waterfront plans, which took priority, but the decision had been explained to all councillors, she said.
When Cr Vandervis maintained he only endorsed a delay releasing the report - not stalling work on it - the debate became heated.
Dr Bidrose insisted that was "simply not true'', while Mr Cull ordered him to withdraw the comment, but Cr Vandervis initially refused to do so.
"Then you are calling us dishonest and you will leave the meeting,'' Mr Cull said.
Cr Vandervis relented, withdrawing the comment, but tempers flared again when he tried to speak later.
Mr Cull had already deemed councillors would get one chance to ask questions and debate, but it appeared some councillors did not realise that.
Cr Vandervis was among them, as his attempt to debate the motion - having asked questions earlier - was blocked by Mr Cull.
Cr Vandervis labelled the move "obscene'', prompting Mr Cull to suggest he should "listen more than you speak and you would understand the instructions''.
However, after taking advice during an adjournment, Mr Cull relented - apologising for the "ill-advised'' process and allowing further debate.
Cr Vandervis then finally had his chance, telling the meeting any decision to revoke an earlier council motion was "a big deal''.
The city continued to face difficulties as responsibility for important issues, like public transport, was divided between the DCC and Otago Regional Council.
Investigating a unitary council would show what the future of local government could look like in Dunedin.
"Do we want to know, or do we want to stick our heads in the sand?''
Other councillors disagreed, including Cr Kate Wilson, who believed the council's focus should be on climate change and other community priorities.
Other councillors argued the timing for an investigation was no longer right, given the DCC's improving relationship with the ORC.
Crs Damian Newell and Jim O'Malley remained concerned by the process which had the investigation stalled after discussion in non-public meetings.
Councillors voted 10-4 to scrap the investigation, Crs Vandervis, O'Malley, Rachel Elder and Andrew Whiley opposing.
Related Stories
Comments
How naive to think DCC has an improving relationship with ORC. The ORC treats DCC with contempt and disrespect at every opportunity especially with transportation and consenting outcomes/processes.
No it doesn't.
On the contrary, DCC and ORC co-operated extremely effectively at all levels with the planning, design and construction of the Dunedin city bus hub. I was sceptical at first but, as a person whose main transport mode is bus, I am VERY impressed with the outcome.
If the Council put half the energy in to our city as they do infighting and Crs Vandervis picking on woman workers may I ad that if in any other business that is called bullying . Our city would be the best little city on the block
Having been involved in the local govt reorganisation in 1989, only Gisborne became a unitary council. Now we have Auckland of course and the top of the South Island.
I am now fully in favour of unitary councils, Southland definitely, and Aoraki (Timaru/Waimate/McK/Upper Waitaki) - BUT they have to have a 'geographical' fit - that is, be a "region of cohesion". They of course must contain an entire river catchment area. The only place a river is cut in half in NZ, is the Buller.
Waikato should be, as a tributary of it is in Taranaki land (thats why Whangamomona declares itself a republic) and Taumarunui is King County/Waikato not Manawatu.
Otago as a unitary council would be far too big geographically and unwieldy.
The Clutha could be a regional council on its own leaving Dunedin a unitary council. But that would mean the entire Taieri river (and Waihola) would have to be in Dunedin as also the Maniototo. Doable. But then that leaves Oamaru out on a limb. It would then have to be either part of Ecan (no way would they be Canterbury) or Oamaru would have to be in the new Dunedin unitary council.
Cr V continues to exercise and be exercised, 'ultra animus'.
‘ .....after discussion in non-public meetings’. And there is that much favoured bureaucratic use of the passive: ‘the process had stalled’. So was the process an agent which stalled itself? Obviously not. Let’s return to the more fully descriptive active tense: ‘The process was stalled by someone.’ Or, more usually, ‘Someone stalled the process.’ But ‘someone’ must have made a DECISION to do that and DECISIONS cannot legally made outside properly constituted council meetings. There is a process for excluding the public from a properly constituted council meeting if necessary. But ALL of the public are excluded when decisions are made in ‘informal’ meetings and there is a risk that some of the councillors might be excluded too. ‘Informal’ meetings of members of the elected Council where decisions are made are not in accord with the legal requirements of the Local Government Act. Not transparent, inclusive and accountable.
I am so sick of the stupid game playing at the DCC. It strikes me that Dave Cull has lost sight of doing the right thing the right way in his ongoing bid to please everyone, Lee Vandervis' legitimate concerns get swamped by his inability to be socially adept, and Sue Bidrose has got so cosy with the Mayor and some councillors that she is compromised and political. And don't get me started on the Council's foolish pursuit of vanity projects... Time for some turnover next election!