Vandervis emails batch 2 #Dunedin #infrastructure #flood #mudtanks

Batch #2 being 11 of 21 emails
Received from Cr Lee Vandervis on Sun, 24 Apr 2016 from 08:45 AM

See Batch #1 here.
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The original emails have been archived by What if?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

_____________________________________

EMAIL 6

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:25:01 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 08:40:32 +1200
To: Sandy Graham, Sue Bidrose [DCC]
Cc: Tony Avery, Doug Hall [DCC]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
Subject: Re: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”

Hi Sue and Sandy,

Further to my previous email please note that, contrary to the response below, several suburbs of Dunedin have again become mini-lakes districts as a result of the 5pm rain we have had yesterday.
In one drive to Calvin’s place, many blocked mudtanks creating mini-lakes were evident in Hilary st, Orbell st, Fea st and Ramsey st with rivers running from these mini-lakes all over the roads, proving widespread failure of our mudtank structures.
The claims below that 95% of mudtanks have been properly cleaned or that this might have been due to a particularly severe rain event, high tide, or a lack of capacity down-stream are obviously not the case.
Unpleasant options beckon.

Regards,
Lee

On 15/01/14 3:52 PM, “Sandy Graham” [DCC] wrote:
Dear Lee

Please find below information from staff about the operation of the mudtank structures with specific reference to the rain event on 16 December 2013 as per your enquiry to Sue and Tony of 17 December 2013. Sue has asked that I respond on her behalf noting that Tony is still on leave. In summary, the note explains that there was not a widespread failure of the mudtank system on 16 December 2013. It also details how the system is inspected and maintained. The issue you raise about debris on the roads is also addressed.

{Continues}
See EMAIL 3 at this post.

EMAIL 7

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:31:57 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:31:01 +1200
To: Sandy Graham [DCC]
Cc: Sue Bidrose, Tony Avery, Doug Hall [DCC]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
Subject: Re: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”

Dear Sandy,

A DCC department is not a ‘who’.
Can I please have the names of those people who supplied you with the ‘information’ in the response to my mudtanks questions, from both Transportation Operations and Water and Waste.
It is important for me to know who produces such information.

Can you please also advise who is the person in Transportation operations who is ultimately responsible for the audit of contractor performance?

The difficulties I regularly experience in discovering who authors or produces information to Councillors is becoming a serious issue.

Cheers,
Lee

On 17/01/14 12:03 PM, “Sandy Graham” [DCC] wrote:
Dear Lee

In answer to your questions:

1. The response of 15 Jan 2014 was the result of information supplied by staff from both Transportation Operations and Water and Waste. The response is on behalf of the CEO under my signature – I wrote the final response.

2. Staff in Transportation Operations are responsible for the audit of the contractor performance.

Cheers
Sandy

From: Lee Vandervis
Sent: Friday, 17 January 2014 10:21 a.m.
To: Sandy Graham [DCC]
Cc: Sue Bidrose; Tony Avery; Doug Hall [DCC]
Subject: Re: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”

Dear Sandy,

I think that you are missing the point that there are blocked mudtanks everywhere in Dunedin.
Again,
Can you please let me know;
1 – who wrote the mudtanks/flooding response below?
2 – who is responsible for the accuracy of the monthly mudtank audits?

Cheers,
Lee

On 17/01/14 9:15 AM, “Sandy Graham” [DCC] wrote:
Dear Lee

Staff will check the Pine Hill areas that you list below today. If following inspection, there is a blocked mudtank it will be remedied. FYI, this is the standard process we follow when we receive advice from a member of the public that there may be an issue with mudtank(s) in a particular area.

Regards
Sandy

EMAIL 8

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:32:22 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: More mudtank misery.
Subject: FW: More mudtank misery.

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:40:58 +1200
To: Tony Avery [ODT]
Cc: Sandy Graham [ODT]
Conversation: More mudtank misery.
Subject: More mudtank misery.

Hi Tony,

I have had a verbal and written complaint from the owners of Davies Heat ‘n’ Cool over the flooding of their 1 Donald st premises, and the DCC failure to address the issue of future flooding.
In the past flooding has been so severe that a complete evacuation and insurance claim cleaning of all carpets was necessary.
This because the camber Kaikorai Valley on the intersection with Donald st is so flat that water streaming down the road from the east side of Kaikorai Valley road during extreme rain events crosses the road at the intersection and it all ends up in the two mudtanks on Donald st, which routinely do not cope.
These Kaikorai Valley mudtanks would appear to be have the same problem as those I have previously identified in Roslyn, Pine Hill, central city, and anywhere else I have been in a heavy rain event – namely that they have not been cleaned to the 150mm below outlet pipe as required under the DCC contract.

The ongoing failure of contractors to do the mudtank cleaning for over a year now has escalated to utter abysmal farce.

Both Donald st mudtanks need to be properly cleaned, and a raised subtle berm of asphalt needs to be added to the middle of the Donald st intersection to prevent storm-water from east Kaikorai Valley crossing the intersection at this point and flooding west Kaikorai Valley road/Donald st.

Please let me know how soon both of these issues will take to be addressed.

Kind regards,
Lee
—— End of Forwarded Message

EMAIL 9

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:33:38 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – thank you for your time and candour today – Lee
Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – thank you for your time and candour today – Lee

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 21:38:34 +1200
To: Grant McKenzie [DCC]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – thank you for your time and candour today – Lee
Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – thank you for your time and candour today – Lee

—— Forwarded Message
From: Andrew Noone
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 19:24:07 +1200
To: Lee Vandervis
Subject: RE: Mudtanks

Hi Lee,
Noted, we must continue a surveillance mode though with current contract as your suggestion will not impact on any existing contract.

We continue to push for ongoing “gatherings” with FH as they will not be wanting bad press considering where they are in the cycle of the 5 year contract.

Cheers
Andrew

From: Lee Vandervis
Sent: Thursday, 30 June 2011 06:33 p.m.
To: Andrew Noone
Subject: FW: Mudtanks

G’day Andrew,

The attached edited info shows that only 19 from $281,000 has been withheld. No wonder they are unconcerned. They are cleaning up at the bank without doing the mud tanks.

All the more reason for us to get a Tenders Board with Councillors on it asap.

Cheers,
Lee

—— End of Forwarded Message

—— End of Forwarded Message

EMAIL 10

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:36:04 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: LGOIMA request
Subject: FW: LGOIMA request

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 19:59:43 +1200
To: Sue Bidrose, Sandy Graham [DCC]
Conversation: LGOIMA request
Subject: LGOIMA request

Dear Sue and Sandy,

Re the mudtanks issue highlighted below, can you please confirm how much Fulton Hogan were paid for mudtank cleaning during the time their sucker truck resource was in ChCh and consequently not doing the job they were contracted for here.
Please provide details including original contract copy, of the contract, the amount tendered for, and the amount paid which I understand had a percentage reduction for lack of performance.

Regards,
Cr. Vandervis

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 13:46:06 +1200
To: Sue Bidrose, Sandy Graham [DCC]
Conversation: Audit and Risk Subcommittee agenda 30/10/14
Subject: Audit and Risk Subcommittee agenda 30/10/14

Dear Sue and Sandy,

My initial hopes for the Audit and Risk Subcommittee have taken another dive with the latest A&R agenda.

You could characterise my major fraud concerns at the DCC as being mainly with the very large potential vulnerability for ratepayers involved in DCC contract and tendering processes.
I have told you of some of my personal experiences of fraud as a DCC contractor for several decades, and of my enormous frustration at not being able to get corrupt DCC contracting and tendering processes changed in the decade since I was elected.

An example of these kinds of corrupt processes is the one I have voiced often over the last year hoping for appropriate action, where Fulton Hogan were contracted to clean mudtanks to a specified level and were paid over $150,000 to do this work when they did not do it. Fulton Hogan have admitted in a meeting with me and DCC staff [including Peter Standring –who at the time I assumed worked for FH as he defended them] that their mud-tank cleaning sucker truck was needed for urgent Christchurch earthquake work and that this was the reason they did not fulfil the contract which they none-the-less accepted DCC payment for. Staff vociferously defending this indefensible FH ripping of our ratepayers included Graeme Hamilton [now departed], Teflon Tony Avery [soon to be departed], and Ewan Matheson [departed now finally being paid by Fulton Hogan].

Despite my increasingly strident calls for the Audit and Risk Subcommittee Fraud Prevention Policy to address tender and contract fraud, inducement, favoured contractors, massed contracts limiting possible tenders, lack of strategic tendering, and silo tendering allowing senior mangers to run contracting fiefdoms, the latest A&R agenda again fails to identify this massive and endemic type of DCC fraud.

Page 6-10 under definitions lists 16 types of fraud and does not identity any fraud with the words ‘tender’ ‘contract’ ‘strategic tendering’ or even ‘procurement’ which I fought for and had thought ‘conceded’ in previous meetings.
Page 6-14 again lists 16 types of fraud with changes and still does not identity any fraud with the words ‘tender’ ‘contract’ ‘strategic tendering’ or even ‘procurement’.

My lack of confidence in the work of this Subcommittee has now become a deep mistrust. The open hostility of the Chair, the flagrant dismissal of evidence showing widespread fraudulent staff behaviour, and the recent A&R jocularity on the subject of the possibility of a corrupt …. [Deleted. -Eds] make me cringe at being part of of this Subcommittee and the whole DCC organisation.

Denial is endemic, cover-up is the default condition, and vilifying anyone who asks awkward questions is my long experience of trying to clean out the DCC. I now need to add, unacceptably slow and incomplete responses to this Councillor’s LGOIMA requests for information.

As I have previously said to both of you, our Citifleet manager’s tragic ‘sudden death’ is an unprecedented opportunity to efface the DCC self-serving staff culture.
I have done what I can, and at more personal risk than can be expected of an elected representative. The opportunity is currently slipping away.

What if anything are you two going to do about the tendering debacle in general and the Fulton Hogan unfulfilled mudtank cleaning contract in particular?

Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis

—— End of Forwarded Message

—— End of Forwarded Message

EMAIL 11

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:38:25 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” – their big sucker truck was in Chch for the whole year!
Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” – their big sucker truck was in Chch for the whole year!

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 22:40:38 +1200
To: Neil Johnstone [chartered engineer]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” – their big sucker truck was in Chch for the whole year!
Subject: Re: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” – their big sucker truck was in Chch for the whole year!

Eg from What If blog:

JimmyJones
June 5, 2015 at 12:12 am
Lyndon: Dunedin experienced two bad floods, one in 1923, and another in 1929. More rain fell in the 24-hour periods than what we got on Tuesday/Wednesday. In the first 1923 flood, 229mm (9.02 inches) fell (measured at Musselburgh) and in 1929, 279mm (11.0 inches) fell (measured at Ross Creek reservoir). Figures are from “City of Dunedin”, a history by K C McDonald. Our recent big rain was only 175mm in 24 hours. Probably it wasn’t severe enough to be called a one in 100 year event.

Based on these three measurements, it looks like severe rainfall in Dunedin has become less frequent and less intense. And if Tuesday’s flood was caused by Global Warming, then what caused the other floods? If it was the weather that caused the earlier floods, then why would you think that it wasn’t the weather that caused the recent flood?

A very serious problem for crusaders that blame extreme weather on Global warming is that for at least the last 17 years there has been no warming trend of global temperatures. In fact there has been a slight cooling trend. The conclusion is that anything that has happened over the last 17 years can not have been caused by Global Warming (because there has been none). Don’t expect to get credible scientific advice from the Labour Party, Dave Cull or Jinty MacTavish.

On 8/06/15 7:07 PM, “Lee Vandervis” wrote:

Hi Neil,

Thank you for your most informative email.
I concur with your thoughts and believe that most Mayoral and staff flooding pronouncements have been in their PR interests rather than the public interest.

For instance I have sent the following 2013 email trail to the local Dunedin ‘What If’ blog – our best source of local information.

Do I have your permission to forward your email to this blog site and to other personas who may be interested?

It seems that only publicity is able to promote the required changes at the DCC.

Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 22:40:31 +1200
To: Elizabeth Kerr [What if? Dunedin]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” – their big sucker truck was in Chch for the whole year!
Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” – their big sucker truck was in Chch for the whole year!

Hi Elizabeth,

The on-going and vexed issue of mudtank maintenance failure causing blockages and compromise of stormwater systems is highlighted in the following email.
This is just one of many emails I have sent over years to try and get staff to do their jobs in this area.
Your readers may find the attachment particularly insightful.

Regards,
Lee

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 08:04:46 +1200
To: Sue Bidrose, Tony Avery [DCC]
Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” – their big sucker truck was in Chch for the whole year!
Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” – their big sucker truck was in Chch for the whole year!

Hi Sue and Tony,

I withheld publishing a damning opinion piece last year on the failure of DCC staff to ensure that a quarter million dollar mud-tank cleaning contract was actually carried out.
The email below highlighted that Fulton Hogan were paid for a year-long contract that they simply did not carry out.
Assurances from FH and Tony Avery that the failure to do the job would be rapidly fixed have been shown by yesterday’s flash rainfall to be false.
Half the mudtanks in my usual dog walk area are completely blocked and inoperative and it seems a cynical cleaning of just some of the bottom-of-catchment tanks has been undertaken.
Evidence of the widespread failure of mudtanks to drain is seen with gravel and flotsam all over the road in many areas that I have driven around this morning.
Sodden shops wont have been helped by un-cleaned mudtanks.

I do not enjoy showing up staff dereliction, but as a ratepayer’s representative, what options have you left me?

Cr. Vandervis.

—— End of Forwarded Message

EMAIL 12

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:49:03 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: Opinion piece re South Dunedin flood
Subject: FW: Opinion piece re South Dunedin flood

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 21:49:28 +1200
To: Elizabeth Kerr [What if? Dunedin]
Conversation: Opinion piece re South Dunedin flood
Subject: Re: Opinion piece re South Dunedin flood

Hi Elizabeth,

This opinion piece is excessively kind when it says the mud-tank clearing subcontractors did the bare minimum.
In one recent year they did no mudtanks at all and still got paid over a quarter of a million for doing absolutely nothing.
Even after I got DCC staff and the contractor to a meeting where this was admitted, the money was never refunded and the DCC staff responsible for ticking off the contractor’s ‘payment for doing nothing’ were not fired. Just a lot of weasel words about the contractor’s sucker truck doing urgent work for the poor earthquake-traumatised residents of ChCh.

All this cosy contractor relationship BS needs urgently to change. Those currently in control are not doing their jobs.

Cheers,
Lee

—— End of Forwarded Message

EMAIL 13

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:49:56 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: Suction truck
Subject: FW: Suction truck

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 06:52:49 +1200
To: Elizabeth Kerr [What if? Dunedin]
Conversation: Suction truck
Subject: Re: Suction truck

DCC buying a sucker truck is news to me Elizabeth, especially since they have long been paying contractors to do that job, like most other jobs.

Following my complaints about Dunedin mudtanks in my dog-walking area not being cleaned of sediment for years, the DCC have been occasionally subcontracting an Invercargill mud-tank suction company to come up to Dunedin to do ‘selective’ mudtank cleaning, as opposed to doing all of them.
They came up from Invercargill the week after my meeting with DCC staff where the mud-tank contractor admitted they had done no sediment removal from Dunedin tanks for a year ‘because their truck was urgently needed to help on-going ChCh earthquake issues’. The Invercargill based sucker truck began at 9am on the mudtank right outside our house at 47 Garfield Avenue! I talked to the guys operating the Invercargill sucker-truck, and they said they hated doing Dunedin mud-tanks because most Dunedin tanks had been done so seldom that the road grit set like concrete in the bottom of them and they had to be chipped out with a crowbar before the sediment could be properly sucked out. The sucker-truck operators said that this made doing mudtanks properly in Dunedin a very slow job doing only an average of 35 tanks a day, whereas in properly regularly sucked Invercargill they could do an average of up to 170 tanks a day. Proper maintenance really is better than trying a post-flood cure.

I am happy for you to make this public as I have a good email trail supporting all of the above.
Cheers,
Lee

On 3/11/15 10:18 pm, “Elizabeth Kerr” [What if? Dunedin] wrote:

Hi Lee
News just in. I’m told DCC has recently bought itself a new suction truck! Know anything about this?

Cheers, Elizabeth

Sent from my smartphone network

—— End of Forwarded Message

EMAIL 14

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:51:47 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: Sucker Trucks
Subject: FW: Sucker Trucks

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 07:10:26 +1200
To: Kristy Rusher [DCC]
Conversation: Sucker Trucks
Subject: Re: Sucker Trucks

Thank you for the advice below Kristy.
It is very helpful to have the facts.
Kind regards,
Lee

On 4/11/15 5:34 pm, “Kristy Rusher” wrote:
Hi Lee,

I note that you have commented on a recent post on the What-if website regarding the purchase of sucker trucks. I thought you might be interested to know that the DCC has not purchased a suction truck (I have checked with our transport team and water teams).

I suspect the query from Elizabeth Kerr relates to the Tanker Jetter unit that City Care have for the 3 Waters Maintenance contract. Reference to this unit is made in some correspondence in response to questions about cleaning of stormwater pipes (as opposed to mudtanks) which has been recently been released under LGOIMA. When the 3 Waters maintenance was outsourced in Feb 2014, part of the arrangement was that City Care provided a dedicated tanker jetter unit as well as a towable jetter unit. They use the large unit for cleaning the wastewater and stormwater sewers (pipes), and the small unit for clearing blockages. This allows DCC to complete more work for less money than the previous situation where we contracted this kind of work on a job by job basis.

The tanker unit is different from the equipment used for the maintenance of mud tanks, and is performed under a different contract. Mud tanks are maintained as part of the Fulton Hogan road maintenance contract, and Fulton Hogan supplies their own equipment.

Regards,

Kristy Rusher
Manager Civic and Legal, Civic
Dunedin City Council

—— End of Forwarded Message

EMAIL 15

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:51:13 +1200
To: David Loughrey [ODT]
Conversation: Sucker Trucks
Subject: FW: Sucker Trucks

—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 21:30:50 +1200
To: [Name deleted. -Eds]
Conversation: Sucker Trucks
Subject: Re: Sucker Trucks

Thank you for your email [name deleted. -Eds].

Off course it was never a real excuse for the contractor to get paid over
quarter of a million dollars for a year of doing no sucking of any mudtanks.

The supposed absence of a sucker truck was just to divert attention from the
absence of any accountability or integrity of DCC sign-off managers.

Jobs for the boys is bad enough, but it really grates when there is payment
for the boys and no job even begun.

Re flooding, I was up till the early hours filling sandbags out at the St
Clair life saving and doing a few 4WD sorties with sandbags. DCC staff and
Civil defence were notable by their complete absence.
[Sentence deleted. -Eds]

There is a great deal that can very easily be improved at the DCC,

Cheers,
Lee

[Email deleted. -Eds]

—— End of Forwarded Message

EMAIL 16

From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 20:37:12 +1200
To: David Loughrey, Vaughan Elder [ODT]
Conversation: Still to be done at the DCC
Subject: Still to be done at the DCC

Hi David & Vaughan,

My mudtank emails detail several requests for a DCC position for Tenders oversight – somebody who would have both a checking and testing overview of all DCC tendering and who could coordinate and amalgamate Tenders, as well as ensure that overall strategic tendering kept spreading enough around so that there would be several businesses able to competitively tender in future, rather than the current tendency to mass tender and leave it all to FH or DELTA. This has been long resisted, but resistance is weakening.

Having the mudtanks issue outed publicly will also help ensure that other eg roading contracts will be better monitored in future, and the public will be more inclined to report contract issues with all manner of DCC infrastructure.

The issue I had hoped to discuss with Vaughan today related to a new system which would facilitate this public feedback, but unfortunately the required enthusiasm for this change seems not yet there. The details remain confidential as I have hopes that it might still be able to happen several months down the track.

Cheers,
Lee

[ends]

Related Posts and Comments:
28.4.16 The complicity of mudtanks and stormwater drains personified
27.4.16 Vandervis emails batch 1 #Dunedin #infrastructure #flood #mudtanks
27.4.16 DCC meeting and apology NOT Enough— #SouthDunedinFlood
21.4.16 Planning for South Dunedin, but wait….
20.4.16 DCC Politics : Release of Infrastructure Report #SouthDunedinFlood

█ For more, enter the term *flood* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Email images:
large: bharathp666.deviantart.com – android__email_by_bharathp666
small: carleton.ca – android-email-app