Councillors had been about to debate a resolution put forward by Cr David Benson-Pope, who wanted to reverse the council's earlier support for staff to investigate a unitary council for the city.
The investigation - which was to explore the merits of merging the DCC and Otago Regional Council - had been pushed for by Cr Vandervis, who won support for it in 2017.
It emerged last month that work on the investigation had not progressed since then.
That prompted a recent flurry of angry emails between Cr Vandervis, Dunedin City Council chief executive Sue Bidrose and Mayor Dave Cull.
At yesterday's full council meeting, as soon as Cr Benson-Pope had outlined the reasons behind his resolution to scrap any investigation, Cr Kate Wilson acted.
She took advantage of a rarely-used rule in the council's standing orders to prevent further debate by any other councillors, including Cr Vandervis.
The rule permitted any councillor to call for an immediate vote on an issue, ending further debate, if other councillors endorsed the move.
Her move won support from most councillors, who voted 9-5 in favour of her procedural change, prompting Cr Vandervis to stand, pack his bag and leave the meeting.
Crs Jim O'Malley, Aaron Hawkins, Rachel Elder and Andrew Whiley joined Cr Vandervis in opposing the move, but were defeated by Mayor Dave Cull and other councillors.
Councillors then voted 10-1 in support of Cr Benson-Pope's resolution, which was opposed only by Cr O'Malley, while Crs Elder and Whiley abstained.
Cr Vandervis did not respond to a request for comment by last night, but Cr Wilson defended her move despite conceding it was ''not my proudest moment''.
She was concerned by the ''vitriol'' in recent emails involving Cr Vandervis, and did not want to see ''someone who gets angry'' continuing to feature ''on the front page of the ODT''.
She also wanted to protect the relationship with the ORC, which had improved significantly since 2017, she said.
Standing orders provided a mechanism to curtail debate, and ''if good debate is drowned out with really negative comments, then sometimes we need to use the system'', she said.
''Generally, I would use it very, very sparingly, but I honestly think that at the moment, it [Cr Vandervis' behaviour] is a tool for an election campaign, where the net result of any bad behaviour continues to get front-page news for one person.
''And, since I'm not standing again, it doesn't matter if I do it.''
Mr Cull, speaking after the meeting, said he had to accept Cr Wilson's procedural motion and was ''constrained by the rules''.
Asked if he agreed with her move, and whether it was democratic, he insisted it was ''completely democratic''.
Standing orders set the rules for all councillors, and the vote ''puts control completely in the hands of the council''.
''It didn't stop the vote being taken and that was the object of the exercise, so it was a legitimate move on her part.''
On social media last night Cr Whiley said democracy had not been allowed to take place.
As a councillor he did not agree with what had happened and Cr Vandervis had every right to leave the meeting.
Earlier, Cr Benson-Pope, explaining his resolution, said he was not against structural change for local authorities, but had ''considerable unease'' at the volume of ''unprofessional and unpleasant correspondence'' being generated over the issue.
''Not by staff, I must say.''
The relationship with the ORC had improved as the two bodies collaborated on issues from public transport to waterfront development, and investigating a unitary council would be ''most inappropriate'' - particular during an election period, he said.
Related Stories
Comments
Here is an excerpt from DCC Standing Orders:
1.1 Principles
Standing Orders are part of the framework of processes and procedures designed to ensure that our system of local democracy and in particular decision-making within local government is transparent and accountable. They are designed to give effect to the principles of good governance, which include that a local authority should: (among other principles) ensure that decision-making procedures and practices meet the standards of natural justice. (ends)
Either Mayor Cull has not read the last bit, has not understood it or doesn't care about it. He certainly doesn't uphold it, and not just in this particular case either. He regularly shuts Cr Vandervis up. As he has shut me up at Public Forum. Hence my recent protest. This is NOT democracy!
An appalling use of Standing Orders to stymie democratic debate by elected representatives. Every councillor who voted for the motion attached themselves to that deliberate effort to halt debate. The unitary council debate is an important issue for all of Otago - they exist in Auckland, Gisborne, Marlborough, Tasman, Nelson and the Chatham Islands and work effectively. Just because it’s election year, you don’t run away from relevant issues.
Michael (& others), Can I clarify what I said below. I answered that on the basis "Dunedin City" only, wanted to merge with ORC - which is how it was reported. On that basis I give the impression below that Unitary councils can only have one river catchment. Can I make it clear, yes many river catchments can be in a Unitary council. So Clutha & Taieri rivers could all be in one Unitary Council area.
Still given that, there will be an issue in the current Waitaki DC where Kurow & Omarama would have to be in Waimate and or Mackenzie Districts - as there would no longer be a Waitaki District. The only other option is for all of the current Waitaki DC to be in Ecan region!!
The situation is though that by having as I suggest yesterday -would only require voters in DCC to decide. A full Otago wide vote would involve 5 Council citizens voting = good luck.
O deary me. The kids ran out of the creche early before the adults arrived to pick them up.
Newspapers tend to quote (from interviews) people who have grandiose ideas but tend to be short of facts. Come up with an outrageous idea and we read about it. The latest buzz word thanks to Trump is "fact checking". You will often see me on here adding facts where I have a working knowledge in – aviation, ambulance, war history etc. I shouldn’t have to though.
In this case I was involved in local body reorganisation 1989. For Dunedin to be a unitary (district or city combined with regional) council, then it must include the entire river catchment area. The only river split in NZ is the Buller. Dunedin would have to take the entire Taieri. That is taking over Waihola & the Maniototo. That would mean the entire Clutha to be a regional council on its own. Yes that’s all doable. Dunedin already has Middlemarch so taking over Ranfurly would fit.
But then that leaves Palmerston to Omarama (Waitaki Council) out on a limb. Kurow is in the Canterbury region so that could go to Waimate Council but Oamaru would have to be part of Dunedin too.
"Not my proudest moment" would have to be a strong candidate for Understatement of the Year. Ms Wilson's highly unprofessional behaviour doesn't exactly advance the case for more gender diversity on councils.
Council decided in 2107 to investigate a Unitary council. No effort was made by council staff to undertake that investigation.
So who made the decision to ignore the idea? Was it council staff, the Mayor or other councilors?
Whoever made the decision to not do the investigation intentionally undermined a decision of the full council. So we have a person of group of people who think they really run council and no one elses opinions matter.
That stinks and seriously undermines democracy in Dunedin. The backroom smarties need to stand up and explain their actions. Judging by recent actions that will not happen soon. At least not with this bunch of councilors.
"She ... did not want to see ''someone who gets angry'' continuing to feature ''on the front page of the ODT''.
This is called freedom of press and is actually none of your business Cr Wilson
Cr Vandervis is constantly the only person we have trying to hold the others to account for their often shady actions and this is what they do.
I suppose the best defence is a headlong assault.
Oh when can we get rid of this left wing/green cabal of un-representitive councillors?
Oh, fairly soon. Good bye y'all and I hope you can find a proper job in the real world.
DugUp touches on an important issue about a local government re-organisation proposal. I had experience of this when the government of the day (Labour) was determined to force through amalgamation of smaller local bodies whether they liked it or nor. (About 1990). Waiheke DIDN’T like it and neither did Devonport and there was provision for a poll which kind of looked democratic. But it wasn’t. Because the population of the then Auckland City was way greater than the population of Waiheke and most Aucklanders wouldn’t care either way. But they had to be included in the poll. So even if 100% of Waihekeans opposed amalgamation, they had no say. Same thing here ( if the law hasn’t changed.) However, the ORC is so dysfunctional, that i think there is a real chance that all of the constituent local bodies would agree to get rid of it and carve up its territory amongst themselves. There may have to be separate river boards. Any further thoughts on this, DugUp? Michael Laws might be a good person to lead this.