Chief executive Sandy Graham’s use of the term "f...tard" to describe councillors was totally inappropriate, Cr Mayhem said.
She was speaking as the council’s disability issues representative and, though her observation was unremarkable, it was much more than other councillors were prepared to say yesterday.
"We’ve been told not to say anything, because it’s an employment matter," Cr Mayhem said.
Cr Sophie Barker offered some general thoughts about behaviour standards, but was careful to stay away from commenting about the chief executive.
Cr Bill Acklin spoke freely in support of the chief executive and Cr Jim O’Malley was worried about treading into the territory of employment law.
A council spokesman said yesterday councillors had been "reminded of their legal and privacy obligations as an employer".
This was standard for an employment matter, he said.
The Otago Daily Times reported yesterday Ms Graham had repeatedly used inflammatory language to describe Dunedin Mayor Jules Radich, councillors and parts of her organisation.
The ODT relied on a series of sources to document the "f...tards" slur, among others.
Ms Graham said some of her language had been unprofessional, she had fallen into bad habits that were unacceptable and she apologised.
Asked questions such as whether lack of respect for the governance arm of the council was acceptable, most councillors had no comment yesterday.
The ODT also received information yesterday about the cost of an investigation into Ms Graham’s behaviour after a complaint about bullying.
A report by Maria Dew, KC, cost $132,509.01, including GST.
The council has not disclosed what the findings of the investigation were.
The bill from law firm Anderson Lloyd in relation to the matter was $122,069.67, including GST, the council said yesterday.
Not all councillors have been allowed to see Ms Dew’s report — it rests with a decision-making committee on behalf of the full council — and Cr Mayhem was uncomfortable with that.
"I think we made a mistake giving our decision-making to that committee," she said.
"I don’t think we realised what the implications of that would be — that we didn’t get to see the report."
Returning to the subject of Ms Graham’s language, Cr Mayhem said bringing up images of idiots and "retards" was uncalled for.
"It’s totally inappropriate to make reference to anybody with an intellectual disability," she said.
"I’m outraged on behalf of the disabilities people in the city — that is just really archaic language.
"It reflects really badly on the organisation."
Cr Acklin was disgusted by reporting from the ODT on the issue, saying it produced a dramatisation laced with spin.
The council was dealing with an employment issue and this was not meant to be a matter for the wider community, he said.
Cr Acklin said he continued to have confidence in the chief executive.
Councillors were able to speak freely within reason and they were routinely out of line themselves, he said.
They also received significant flak from the public while carrying out their role, he said.
"Imagine the names we are called from the community," Cr Acklin said.
"What’s the big deal?"
Cr Barker said she had previously shown she did not condone unacceptable behaviour, such as harassment or minimisation of racism.
"It is painful for our community when city leaders let themselves down," she said.
"Our city deserves respectful leadership where every person is valued and treated considerately."
Cr Barker said leaders needed to be careful with their language.
"I am deeply concerned, apologetic and empathetic for anyone hurt by any derogatory language in any setting."
