During yesterday’s Dunedin City Council meeting, property owner Phil Day was interrupted by councillors while speaking about upgrades to lower Stuart St and Bath St.
He owned several properties there and was not in favour of the council’s proposal to paint rainbow crossings at both ends of Bath St.
"We get ... paid staff pushing their own agendas," Mr Day said.
A rainbow crossing would "open up a can of worms" about council funding of projects for minority groups, Mr Day said.
"Why can’t the deerstalkers have a crossing?" he asked.
"The outcome we want here is, [first], more consultation on the owners of the properties who might have the gay writing outside their door.
"The wokeism on this ..."
Cr Marie Laufiso interrupted him, saying Mr Day’s comments were disrespectful.
Mayor Jules Radich did not uphold her point of order.
"The speaker has an opinion, and so it’s reasonable to express that opinion. I didn’t hear any disrespect," Mr Radich said.
"Well, you haven’t been listening," Cr Laufiso responded.
Mr Radich asked Mr Day to continue but Cr Steve Walker cut in, saying the comment about the agenda of council staff was a misrepresentation.
The mayor also dismissed this — it was unreasonable to expect public forum speakers to use correct terminology, he said.
"There’s no point raising points of order for the purpose of interjection."
Cr Lee Vandervis raised his own point of order about Cr Laufiso’s "highly disrespectful" comment about the mayor’s attention.
Mr Radich upheld it before being told he could not rule on decisions involving himself.
Deputy mayor Cherry Lucas upheld the point of order and Cr Laufiso was asked to apologise. She instead withdrew her comments.
Mr Day finished his submission and took questions from councillors.
Later in the meeting, climate and city growth general manager Scott MacLean told the council the rainbow crossing design was indicative only.
"We need to bring it back to you folk first before we then go and speak to the people of Bath St and wider community to see what they think."
The proposed design referenced the weaving of a hīnaki (eel trap) with the colours of the progressive pride flag.
However, as there was no final design, staff did not yet know the cost of materials or installation, Mr MacLean said.
"We have a very tight budget so any of those additional elements, other than the construction of the road, we will do out best to fit in. but we may not be able to accommodate any."
In 2021, the planning and environment committee approved the investigation and installation of a rainbow crossing and last year the council agreed to a moderate level upgrade of Bath St.
Cr Mandy Mayhem wholeheartedly supported the rainbow crossing but agreed with other councillors the design was "busy".
She had been contacted by members of the disability community who said the initial design would be distracting for those with balance and sensory conditions.
"People who suffer cognitive impairment or decline will find those busy patterns very disorientating," she said.
Cr Bill Acklin objected to any designs on the road, regardless of the community it represented.
"The dangers I think it would create are just overwhelming."
Cr Christine Garey said she loved the initial design but recognised it was something which would require compromise.
The councillors confirmed the installation of a rainbow crossing, with Cr Acklin voting against the motion.
Council staff will developed a final design with stakeholders which will be reported back to council.
Councillors also unanimously approved the use of stock materials for the Bath St project.
