Batch #1 being 5 of 21 emails
Received from Cr Lee Vandervis on Sun, 24 Apr 2016 from 08:45 AM
A second batch will be posted shortly; a small number of emails considered objectionable have been withheld.
Where appropriate, all contact information has been removed.
The original emails have been archived by What if? Dunedin.
Election Year : This post is offered in the public interest. -Eds
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2016 08:45:35 +1200
To: EditorODT, Vaughan Elder, Tim Brown, Nicholas GS Smith [ODT]
Conversation: Flooding Mud-bath
Subject: Flooding Mud-bath
Letter to the Editor
Perhaps Mayor Cull only takes showers and does not realise that a bath won’t empty when the plug hole is blocked.
As the Councillor who was filling hundreds of sandbags into the early hours of June 4th in the tremendous community effort to fight back the floodwaters, I had first hand experience of the high water remaining long after the rain had stopped, and well into the next day. Hundreds of South Dunedin and other Dunedin residents took an appalling bath, followed by further property value damage from Mayor Cull ludicrously suggesting sea-level-rise greenwash as requiring a ‘managed retreat’ from South Dunedin. South Dunedin has great investment potential which should be realised, beginning with a big pump that works.
Cr. Lee Vandervis
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2016 10:03:40 +1200
To: Ruth Stokes, Sue Bidrose, Sandy Graham, Laura McElhone, Andrew Noone, Andrew Whiley, Chris Staynes, Doug Hall, Hilary Calvert, John Bezett, Jinty MacTavish, Kate Wilson, Lee Vandervis, Mayor Cull, Mike Lord, Neville Peat, Richard Thomson, David Benson-Pope, Aaron Hawkins
Conversation: Questions re June 3rd 2015 floods.
Subject: Questions re June 3rd 2015 floods.
In the interest of Tenders transparency, last month I enquired of staff whether FH had bought City Care, as City Care’s new ownership remained a closely kept secret and rumours circulated.
Given the City Care appraisal of mudtank maintenance in our Infrastructure Services Committee Agenda, knowing the new ownership of City Care now takes on increased importance.
Who are City Care’s new owners, and do Fulton Hogan have any financial or other interest in or influence over City Care?
In Item 5 a number of other questions arise:
1 – why is there no mention of Mayor Cull’s claimed contribution to flooding from sea-level-rise? Has this been contribution been assessed as nil? If not, why not?
2 – Is it true that City Care applied to do screen clearing prior to the June 3rd flood event, but were not authorised by DCC staff to do so in time for the flood? 
3 – Does the statement “a proactive maintenance regime is important to manage and maintain overland flows into the storm water system” mean that without this proactive maintenance, flooding effects will be more damaging due to the restricted ability to drain? 
4 – What is the contract specification for cleaning of the mudtank outlet lateral pipes which are compromised when mudtank debris has not been kept “at least 150mm below outlet”? 
5 – where/when is the FH ‘30% full proxy’ first recorded in DCC files? 
6 – If 26% of draining mudtanks were totally blocked, and a further 36% partially blocked, would this drainage blockage not mean that flooding effects would be made worse as a result? 
7 – Does 230T  mean 230 tonnes of debris was removed from mudtanks? When was this removed, and by whom, and at what cost to whom? 
8 – which ‘water’ “would have been unable to enter the network even if all mudtanks were clear”. Why would this ‘water’ not be able to enter the network? Is this because network screens were blocked or pumps not working adequately? 
9 – Was water below road level  a major contributor to flooding and damage of houses? Viz, how many houses’ floor levels are below road level in South Dunedin?
10 – What alternative internal management regime is being considered?  is an updated resident cellphone-photo-text-alert monitoring system being considered to replace our old fixagram system?
11 – Who have been the successful tenderers for the new separable portion of the Mudtank maintenance contract? And who were the businesses that tendered for this separable portion?
Looking forward to answers that will further inform debate on item 5.