But she was later forced to withdraw that term as the council's strategy committee decided to withdraw Variation 9 to its district plan.
The variation, a formal process under the Resource Management Act, was aimed at revitalising the harbour area by ensuring activities and development were managed to retain its heritage, nature conservation and amenity values, keeping the harbour as a working port, and maintaining public access.
However, the committee decided the variation, a process which had already taken two years and was likely to cost ratepayers another $80,000 or more, was not now needed.
The council now controls most of the land in the area, which meant it decided how it was used, and has a Harbourside plan which outlines how development should take place.
But Cr Stead was not happy the committee was going to withdraw the variation, particularly after it had already been publicly advertised and about 400 submissions and cross-submissions had been received.
The community should decide how development in the harbour area should proceed, not the council.
There should be further public discussion, she said.
Cr Jim Hopkins was worried the committee was about to make a decision without further public input.
Having the strategy committee decide also meant some councillors, not on that committee, did not have a vote.
He wanted the committee to make a recommendation to the next council meeting which would give all councillors a vote as well as give people a chance to make comment at the public forum.
However, Waitaki Mayor Alex Familton said the public had been critical of delays and wanted development to start.
The variation would have delayed that.
"We know what the public wants through their submissions [on the variation] and the public also want us to make progress. We should not procrastinate any further," he said.
Chief executive Michael Ross believed the Harbourside plan should cover future development.
The plan had been prepared in consultation with groups and individuals who had an interest in the area.
