Dunedin Mayor Jules Radich and Cr Lee Vandervis sought to stop further cycle-ways spending.
However, their motion to have all further planned Dunedin City Council cycleways funding reviewed — because of ‘‘very low and declining use’’ of cycle lanes — failed.
This despite DCC’s own cycleway counter evidence of low and falling cycleway use.
This is the DCC cycle-count data that Cr Walker and others have long claimed would show increasing cycle usage over the last 4 years, when there has actually been a decline in cycle lane usage from 2022 despite an increasing Dunedin population…
NZTA might be forgiven for thinking it is still winter here in Dunedin, but spending our road taxes on such patronising road ‘safety’ advertising is surely a distracting waste of our money.
DCC Economic Development Agenda Data spoken of positively by many Councillors
when in fact every significant comparison of Dunedin data compared to New Zealand averages data showed Dunedin to be below average, in many cases well below average.
Look at how low Dunedin Average House Values are compared to the NZ average.
The hard 2023 data ran for scores of pages in our agenda but my speech summary notes show the significant standards.
Most elected representatives are in serious denial when trying to highlight good news from these latest figures, and have accused me of talking Dunedin down when highlighting the hard facts.
I believe that clearly identifying problems is the necessary first step to solving these problems.
This seesaw was $50 on FaceBook Marketplace at the time, and seems much better value to me.
finding out how this $600,000 was spent is as below.
From: Sharon Bodeker <Sharon.Bodeker@dcc.govt.nz>
Date: Thursday, 21 November 2024 at 4:25 PM
To: Lee Vandervis <lee@vandervision.co.nz>
Subject: FW: LGOIMA request
Dear Lee
Further to your email below, please find attached invoice details of the George St playground as requested. I note that some of the items on the ENI invoice to Isaac have been redacted as not being costs relating to the playground.
I apologise for the delay in sending this information to you.
Kind regards
Sharon
From: Jenny Lapham <Jenny.Lapham@dcc.govt.nz>
Sent: Thursday, 24 October 2024 3:32 p.m.
To: Official Information <officialinformation@dcc.govt.nz>
Subject: FW: LGOIMA request
From: Lee Vandervis <lee@vandervision.co.nz>
Sent: Wednesday, 16 October 2024 11:18 p.m.
To: Sharon Bodeker <Sharon.Bodeker@dcc.govt.nz>; Jenny Lapham <Jenny.Lapham@dcc.govt.nz>
Subject: LGOIMA request
Hi Sharon and Jenny,
Can you please forward to my email detailed copies of original paid invoices for the George street playground that amount to the publicised $600,000 cost of the playground.
Kind regards,
Lee
Michael Laws has independently asked questions that I have long been asking [and have had racist accusations from other Councillors and Code of Conduct complaints for my trouble] but Laws has gone further to uncover the extent of ‘relationship funding’ with Maori in Local Government across NZ…
Check out this page https://theplatform.kiwi/podcasts/episode/michael-laws-why-did-the-otago-regional-council-pay-usd5-3m-to-iwi
Central Government funding of Maori is in addition.
If you Google NZ Government Funding for Maori there are 15 pages of Google headings to search through to get an idea of the scale of it.
https://www.google.com/search?q=NZ+Government+Funding+for+Maori&sca_esv=da447278f1366733&sxsrf=ADLYWIJZVoXt2gZR66ugYDASwhzZHns1ig:1728803084089&ei=DHELZ8eRBfiX0-kP9cHv6QE&start=0&sa=N&sstk=Aagrsuj9W84hMmi2QmmqH1nKF1zzKznbTMKn5sgpl9Z6bkKBLSumG1tMM2-g2vMcj9z6of6p3j62FA95hbh4uBYgCJwhoeU5DDFc4J1MTf4ryUyzvcNpSHjbGkdXjmLEJfSJOn9hy3ZdguhWb_uOqF3to87-j7VorFA-sjOfXYy64LbNx-urkO1bq1pgKQYKWvR-Top1LSM-EPPAnxf3GnZKoUqft4OtqYIIW2_ogN-6hpLoxrzZQYeQv19OkPLXshOLSCwe4XkKG4C2PCz5BFbeG5U4SQ1-DBH4dgL8dAxU7WoIo5cWJkB1L2Df&ved=2ahUKEwjHx9qt5YqJAxX4yzQHHfXgOx04FBDy0wN6BAgFEAQ&biw=1262&bih=679&dpr=2
My questioning of how we could vote for a Plan with more than a dozen illegible pages and scores of untranslated Maori words and phrases was met with various Councillor rebuffs, including:
Cr Walker’s claim that although much of the public print version was too small to read our computer version could be expanded to make it readable. If this was true for Cr Walker’s computer it was certainly not true for mine as this exploded screenshot of part of a significant page proves.
How can you debate leave alone approve a Ngai Tahu Climate Change Strategy when you can’t read it?
Cr Garey said of my complaint of all the untranslated Maori words and phrases that I should up-skill my knowledge of Te Reo so that I could read and understand such agendas.
My long experience of DCC Councillors is that none of them have the comprehensive Te Reo ability to understand much of what is in this agenda Item 11, and in any case DCC agendas are supposed to be able to be read and understood by the general public.
Embarrassingly for me, the DCC went ahead and voted to approve the entire Implementation Plan for Te Taki Haruru despite not being able to read significant parts of it like the Climate Change Strategy, and despite not getting any translations of the many Maori words phrases and headings used throughout.
As PM Luxon said yesterday
“”Look, I fully understand the frustration. It’s also frustrating for a government that’s been in power for 10 months and inheriting this mess as well.
This is a project that started at $1.2 billion, went to $1.6 billion, we’re putting another $300 million in to bring it up to $1.9 billion.”
From: Lee Vandervis <lee@vandervision.co.nz>
Date: Friday, 4 October 2024 at 9:43 PM
To: Sandy Graham <Sandy.Graham@dcc.govt.nz>, Council 2022-2025 (Elected Members) <council.2022-2025@dcc.govt.nz>
Cc: Executive Leadership Team (ELT) <elt@dcc.govt.nz>, Communications <comms@dcc.govt.nz>
Subject: Complete drainage victory over the most persistent days of heavy rain Dear Sandy and your Team,
Having traversed most of lower-lying South Dunedin without driving through any puddles before nightfall last night and again this evening I believe it is not too early to congratulate you all on a complete drainage victory over the most persistent days of heavy rain in my memory.
There has been no repeat of the $175 million in property damage and the misery of a thousand+ flooded homes as in the similar 2015 rain event, this time with the surface flooding in South Dunedin’s usual low areas mostly contained and diverted.
Notwithstanding still more rain for the next few hours, I believe the potential crisis has been averted, with traditional detention areas like Bathgate Park and the Oval already showing less surface water and only the very low section of Botha street and Surrey st still having water right across part of the road. The video camera man at the Hillside end of Surrey street seemed rather dejected having little to report.
This below was the only bit of Tainui’s Botha street with ponding at 6pm this evening.
No doubt staff will have an enormous clean-up operation with slips etc in the coming days, but they have already succeeded in reopening slip/tree-blocked parts of Peninsula roads and all the houses I have seen have maintained dry floors.
There has been only a fraction of the sandbagging required compared to 2015 when my Landcruiser had water coming in under the door sills as I delivered sandbags needed in many South Dunedin Streets and saw families having to wade away from their flooded homes to higher ground.
All drains and mud-tanks appeared to cope well with enormous and continuing quantities of water efficiently pumped away, and even the often leaf-blocked Queens Drive mud-tank just south of Olveston was draining efficiently.
I look forward to the eventual debriefing on what went so well and what might still be done better in the future, but in the meantime look forward to an anxiety-free night of sound sleep.
Best regards and thanks for so many jobs well done!!
Lee
when in fact every significant comparison of Dunedin data compared to New Zealand averages data showed Dunedin to be below average, in many cases well below average. Look at how low Dunedin Average House Values are compared to the NZ average.
The hard 2023 data ran for scores of pages but my speech summary notes above show the significant standards.
Most elected representatives are in serious denial when trying to highlight good news from these latest figures, and have accused me of talking Dunedin down in highlighting the hard facts.
I believe that clearly identifying problems is the necessary first step to solving the problems.
A significant opportunity to address our unsustainable debt and to get some income from our companies has been lost today, with enormous risks going forward, including being overwhelmed by debt and possibly losing Aurora’s value to a government centralising scheme which makes more sense for connected lines companies than it did for disconnected water businesses.
Wednesday, 25 September 2024
Aurora Energy is not for sale.
The Dunedin City Council decided this afternoon to retain the company.
The vote was passed 13-2 and greeted by a ripple of applause from a packed public gallery.
In the end, any momentum for a possible sale collapsed under the weight of strong public feedback against it.
The resolution to keep the company was moved by Dunedin Mayor Jules Radich.
Feedback from residents had been clear, he said.
“They are simply not ready to sell. Perhaps in the future that might change, but not today.”
Mr Radich said many ratepayers viewed the company as a strategic asset and they wanted it retained for the long term.
It would grow in value, he said.
However, the choice would not ease pressure on rates and it might force tightening of the belt, he said.
People against the sale of Aurora Energy attended the council meeting today. PHOTO: CRAIG BAXTER
A good financial case for a sale had been made, but it could not proceed in the circumstances.
Cr Lee Vandervis said it was the wrong decision, as it would increase debt and rates.
The matter would need to be revisited “in a few short years”.
Cr Marie Laufiso said the decision was a test in values.
She rejected economic neoliberalism, including privatisation of assets.
Crs Sophie Barker and Christine Garey said public feedback had been loud and clear.
“This is democracy at work,” Cr Garey said.
Aurora distributes electricity to Dunedin, Central Otago, Wānaka and Queenstown.
Any sale price had been tipped to comfortably exceed $1 billion. This would have allowed the council to set up a diversified fund worth hundreds of millions of dollars, providing an alternative revenue stream to rates.
Dunedin deputy mayor Cherry Lucas said this could have reduced risk for the council.
Aurora was profitable, but it would require a significant capital spend into the future, funded by debt.
Rates would not have to increase as much if the council sold the company, she said.
“People are already finding it hard to pay the rates.”
Cr David Benson-Pope said world markets were volatile and confidence about reliable returns coming from a fund had to be open to question.
Had the public voice not been so clearly articulated, the outcome of the vote might have been different, he said.
Aurora is the largest trading company in the Dunedin City Holdings (DCHL) group, which is owned by the council.
DCHL had recommended a sale.
The council pitched a proposal to the public in March this year for a possible sale. It received more than 750 submissions and held a public hearing in May.
There had since been workshops run by DCHL and council staff, while public opposition to a sale remained determined.
Cr Bill Acklin thanked DCHL for its professionalism.
Cr Acklin said he had initially bought into the idea of selling the company because the council was in financial strife.
Listening to the ratepayers was his first duty, he said.
Cr Andrew Whiley said he ended up coming to the conclusion retaining Aurora was in the best interests of the city.
He would not be against a partial float of the company.
Crs Lucas and Vandervis voted against the resolution to retain the company.
Apparently this Kiwiblog bloke has been able to find the following political costs:
I have been voting to stop DCC funding of self-serving Local Government New Zealand for over a decade and have always refused to go to their conferences.
Recently both Auckland and Christchurch have stopped funding LGNZ.
Dunedin should do the same.
Cr. Michael Laws publicly calls them ‘troughers’ for good reason in my view.
August 28, 2024 3:00pm by David Farrar
A tale of two conferences
A number of readers attended both the recent National Party Annual Conference and the Local Government annual conference. They were struck by the differences between the two. A key factor being that those who attend the National conference pay the cost themselves and those who attend the LG conference have ratepayers pay the cost.
Amazing the difference it makes, depending on who has to pay!
Imagine there’s one rates bill,
It’s easy if you try
One group of Councillors to vote for
Imagine all Dunedin, building the same way…
Imagine no duplication
It isn’t hard to do
One environmental set of guidelines
No fundamentalism too
Imagine all our citizens, with permits from one place…
You may say we are dreamers
But we’re not the only ones
I hope some day you’ll vote Unitary
And then Dunedin can be as one
Imagine that there’s public transport
Roads and parking all run by the same
Bureaucracy with no division
Harbourside roads stores with the same aim
Imagine Port Otago, main port for the South
You may say we are dreamers
But we’re not the only ones
I hope some day you’ll vote Unitary
And then Dunedin will be as one
LV25/1/17
Tuesday, 27 August 2024
Dunedin-only unitary authority suggested
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/dunedin-only-unitary-authority-suggested
The Dunedin City Council have requested I make an apology and much else beyond the powers of the DCC Code of Conduct rules.
My response to their over-reach was made public by the DCC today.
From: Lee Vandervis <lee@vandervision.co.nz>
Date: Tuesday, 20 August 2024 at 4:18 PM
To: Edward Ellison; Andrew Rouvi; Donna Matahaere-Atariki; Rachel Wesley; Caron Ward; David Ellison Megan Potiki;Matapura Ellison – ALT; Emma Wyeth- ExecSuzanne Ellison; Vicky Totoro; Marlene McDonald; [private email addresses removed on request]
jeanette.wikaira@dcc.govt.nz<jeanette.wikaira@dcc.govt.nz>, Nicola.morand@dcc.govt.nz <Nicola.morand@dcc.govt.nz>, sandy.graham@dcc.govt.nz <sandy.graham@dcc.govt.nz>, mandy.mayhen@dcc.govt.nz <mandy.mayhen@dcc.govt.nz>, cherry.lucas@dcc.govt.nz <cherry.lucas@dcc.govt.nz>, marie.laufiso@dcc.govt.nz<marie.laufiso@dcc.govt.nz>, jules.radich@dcc.govt.nz <jules.radich@dcc.govt.nz>, sophie.barker@dcc.govt.nz <sophie.barker@dcc.govt.nz>, kevin.gilbert@dcc.govt.nz <kevin.gilbert@dcc.govt.nz>, Andrew.whiley@dcc.govt.nz <Andrew.whiley@dcc.govt.nz>, Christine.garey@dcc.govt.nz<Christine.garey@dcc.govt.nz>, jim.omalley@dcc.govt.nz <jim.omalley@dcc.govt.nz>, brent.weatherall@dcc.govt.nz <brent.weatherall@dcc.govt.nz>, david.benson-pope@dcc.govt.nz <david.benson-pope@dcc.govt.nz>, bill.acklin@dcc.govt.nz <bill.acklin@dcc.govt.nz>, Carmen.houlahan@dcc.govt.nz<Carmen.houlahan@dcc.govt.nz>, steve.walker@dcc.govt.nz <steve.walker@dcc.govt.nz>
Subject: An Apology as formally requested by Elected Members of Ta Pae Maori
Dear Elected and non-Elected members of Te Pae Maori.
I am sorry that some of my statements and actions as an Elected Representative have caused offense to some for which I unreservedly apologise.
Causing offense was never my intention.
Following a 4090 word Code of Conduct complaint brought against me by Cr. Laufiso, the investigator’s opinion is that I have breached the DCC Code of Conduct.
His reasons given included: my refusal to attend Te Pae Maori Protocols and Waiata singing training, refusal to attend Te Pae meetings at Marae with reasons given, and voicing my opinion that giving unelected Maori elite representatives voting rights on two major DCC Standing Committees was undemocratic.
Elected Council Members of Te Pae Maori have subsequently requested that I:
“d) provide a full and unreserved written apology by 5pm
on 20 August, 2024 to the Te Pae membership for the behaviour outlined in the
investigation; and Council also requests that Cr Vandervis makes a commitment to
participate in Te Pae meetings and observe the kawa (protocols) of the host.”
This Council resolution further:
“e) Notes that if an apology has not been received by 20 August 2024, Council staff
will provide a report to the 27 August Council meeting on the possible options
available to Council for a material breach of the Code of Conduct.”
In the debate leading up to this resolution Crs Garey, Barker, Walker, Benson-Pope, Mayhem, Whiley and O’Malley made it clear that they wanted to penalise me by removing me from the position of Chair of Finance and Council Controlled Organisations.
Cr. Benson-Pope had already called for my removal from this Chair over a year earlier on 17/7/23.
Cr. O’Malley went further promising that if I was not removed as Chair he would “refuse to attend” any meetings I was Chairing.
In the Code of Conduct debate of 31/7/24 it was made clear by many Councillors that I was very unlikely to apologise [Cr. O’Malley “…we will not be receiving an apology”] and Cr. Whiley agreed.
Having tried to coerce me with the threat of loss of my Finance and CCO chairmanship [along with its annual near $14,000 addition to salary] into making what Elected Representatives hoped would be a full, unreserved written apology, they also requested that I make ‘a commitment to participate in Te Pae meetings and observe the kawa (protocols) of the host.”
Subsequent Anderson Lloyd legal advice recently sent to all Elected Members is that “We conclude that the second part of the resolution requiring Councillor Vandervis to make a commitment to participate in future meetings and observe kawa or protocols of the host goes beyond the terms of the code of conduct. We conclude this aspect of the resolution is therefore outside Council’s power to require as part of a code of conduct decision.”
The Anderson Lloyd legal advice concludes:
“8 It is our view if there is no apology and a future meeting is convened to consider penalties, any
penalty needs to be confined to the options set out in clause 13.1 of the code of conduct. This
does not extend to requiring future commitments to participate in future meetings. We
recommend against such a resolution because it is outside the terms of the code of conduct.”
The NZ Bill of Rights Act provides me with all the defence I need against these Code of Conduct accusations, particularly the sections relating to freedom of speech, movement, expression and religion.
For the Council to attempt to remove me from an appointed Chair position because I won’t alienate those Rights is beyond Council’s powers. I have not contracted out of NZ Bill of Rights freedoms because I have been elected to the DCC.
It is because I am elected to represent the best interests of Dunedin citizens that I feel obliged to uphold the provisions of the NZ Bill of Rights, especially Freedom of Expression which should always be available to all Dunedin citizens.
Following the Code of Conduct investigator’s report, the Dunedin City Council has only one of eight penalties available under 13.1 of the Code of Conduct.
Elected Representatives have used their one available penalty under 13.1, namely “2. A request (made either privately or publicly) for an apology;” as above, and they have made this request of me publicly along with claims of alleged racism which I reject, and they have caused me reputational harm.
Since Council have already publicly invoked penalty “2. a request (made either privately or publicly) for an apology;” with the negative attendant publicity that I have incurred, I submit that my apology as above now brings to an end the current Code of Conduct process.
Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis
Council Minute Extract – 31 July 2024
full video, the knives are out – https://www.youtube.com/live/AqFfS3ZZ-xM?feature=shared
Moved (Mayor Jules Radich/Cr David Benson-Pope):
That the Council:
a) Upholds the findings of the investigation by the Independent Investigator, Mr
Jordan Boyle into the Code of Conduct complaint made by Cr Marie Laufiso in
respect of Cr Lee Vandervis.
b) Agrees that a material breach of the Code of Conduct has occurred.
c) Notes that Cr Vandervis has declined the opportunity to address the Council.
d) Requests that Cr Vandervis provides a full and unreserved written apology by 5pm
on 20 August, 2024 to the Te Pae membership for the behaviour outlined in the
investigation; and Council also requests that Cr Vandervis makes a commitment to
participate in Te Pae meetings and observe the kawa (protocols) of the host.
e) Notes that if an apology has not been received by 20 August 2024, Council staff
will provide a report to the 27 August Council meeting on the possible options
available to Council for a material breach of the Code of Conduct.
Division
The Council voted by division
For: Crs Bill Acklin, Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Christine Garey, Kevin
Gilbert, Carmen Houlahan, Cherry Lucas, Mandy Mayhem, Jim O’Malley,
Steve Walker, Brent Weatherall, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Jules Radich
(13).
Against: Nil
Abstained: Nil
The division was declared CARRIED by 13 votes to 0
Motion carried (CNL/2024/001)
Membership of Te Pae Maori:
Edward Ellison;
Andrew Rouvi;
Donna Matahaere-Atariki;
Rachel Wesley;
Caron Ward;
David Ellison
Megan Potiki;
Matapura Ellison – ALT;
Emma Wyeth- Exec
Suzanne Ellison;
Vicky Totoro;
Marlene McDonald;
Tania Williams [email addresses removed following request]
Jeanette Wikaira; jeanette.wikaira@dcc.govt.nz
Nicola Morand; Nicola.morand@dcc.govt.nz
Sandy Graham; sandy.graham@dcc.govt.nz
Mandy Mayhem; mandy.mayhen@dcc.govt.nz
Cherry Lucas; cherry.lucas@dcc.govt.nz
Marie Laufiso; marie.laufiso@dcc.govt.nz
Jules Radich; jules.radich@dcc.govt.nz
Sophie Barker; sophie.barker@dcc.govt.nz
Kevin Gilbert; kevin.gilbert@dcc.govt.nz
Andrew Whiley; Andrew.whiley@dcc.govt.nz
Christine Garey; Christine.garey@dcc.govt.nz
Jim O’Malley; jim.omalley@dcc.govt.nz
Brent Weatherall; brent.weatherall@dcc.govt.nz
David Benson-Pope; david.benson-pope@dcc.govt.nz
Bill Acklin; bill.acklin@dcc.govt.nz
Carmen Houlahan; Carmen.houlahan@dcc.govt.nz
Steve Walker; steve.walker@dcc.govt.nz
Not looking forward to coming back to Dunedin chill after summer weather overseas.
Our relatives in Germany treated us Royally for my wife’s sister’s Wedding, ceremony and after-match functions.
Who would guess from the photos that I was the only one of 86 wedding guests in Heidelberg who did not partake of the copious and varied supplies of free alcohol?
From: Lee Vandervis <lee@vandervision.co.nz>
Date: Monday, 29 July 2024 at 7:00 PM
To: Council 2022-2025 (Elected Members) <council.2022-2025@dcc.govt.nz>
Subject: My Response to CoC from Crs Laufiso and Mayhem
Dear All,
Following requests from Dunedin citizens and media, I have decided to make a short written response to the 4090-word Code of Conduct complaint against me alleging racism from Crs Laufiso and Mayhem.
I request that this statement be read out prior to the Council vote on the Conduct debate of 31st July in my absence as I will be attending a family wedding in Heidelberg at the time.
I am happy for the Code of Conduct debate to take place in my absence.
Statement to be read out:
“I can not represent Dunedin citizens by singing, pretending to speak a Maori language, or by voting for more race-based funding of Maori elites and jobs.
I reject all accusations of racism, especially coming from those who repeatedly label me “pale, stale, and male” across the Council table as this personal abuse really is racist, ageist and sexist.
I vow to continue to exercise my Right to Free Speech in the public interest and to be part of the diversity necessary for Democratic representation on the Dunedin City Council.”
Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis
Below is the complete 4090-word Code of Conduct complaint against me from Crs. Laufiso and Mayhem which I made public without comment on my blog leevandervis.com last year.
Posted on December 20, 2023 by Lee Vandervis
Tēnā Koe CEO Graham,
Please accept this letter as a formal complaint against Cr Lee Vandervis under the Dunedin City Council Code of Conduct. The Councillor’s emailed letter, (dated Thursday, 12 /10 / 2023, attached below, Page 4-4, labelled Email Message 1) responded to an emailed message from Ms Nicola Morand, Manahautū – General Manager Māori, Partnerships & Policy (Acting) advising all members of Te Pae Māori as to the agenda for our Monday October 17th meeting being held at Ōtākou Marae.
The Councillor’s letter is yet another example of his demonstrated contempt for Te Pae Māori specifically and both Mana Whenua and Matāwaka generally. As such, this falls well-short of the standards we should expect of someone, not only of his experience but, who holds such a position of responsibility within Council (as Chair of the Finance & CCOs Committee). As a result of the Councillor’s second piece of correspondence, the Te Pae Māori meeting of 17 / 10 / 2023 – for the second time – passed a resolution to not accept his apology, despite Mayor Radich’s and a number of Councillors’ support of Cr Vandervis. The Councillor’s attempts to diminish and undermine the standing of Mana Whenua, are in breach of the following:
Te Pae Māori exists largely as a forum for any such concerns to be raised kanohi ki te kanohi (face-to-face) and directly with the Mayor and Councillors. Therefore, by refusing to participate in meetings of Te Pae Māori, the Councillor is failing in his duty to “be available to listen and respond openly and honestly to community concerns.”
To avoid at the very least the costs of an investigation and the inevitable emotional toll on Tākata Whenua (Mana Whenua and Matāwaka) Colleagues and Staff Members who are members of Te Pae Māori, SPEC or ISCOM, this deeply disappointing matter ought to have been fully and soundly dealt with by Mayor Radich. However, since the first Te Pae Māori meeting at Puketeraki Marae held on Monday, July 17th, Mayor Radich has been asked multiple times, in writing and in person, to address concerns around the Councillor’s behaviour. The Mayor however has done very little to acknowledge, address or remediate these concerns. Such concerns relate to the Councillor’s long-standing antipathy towards Tākata Whenua ~ stemming from wilful ignorance (at the very least) and at worst, bigoted, intolerant-of-difference and racist beliefs. Examples I have personally witnessed/heard in Council Chambers ) :-
• The Councillor’s emailed letter, (dated Sunday, 16 /07 / 2023, attached below, Pages 4-5, labelled Email Message 2) sent 12 hours ahead of the first meeting of Te Pae Māori, held at Puketeraki Marae outlined the Councillor’s objections to the agenda and the Te Pae Māori document as reasons why he would not be attending. Further, I highlight “Regarding Karitane admission requirements detailed verbally at last week’s non-public meeting, I am not prepared to submit to the sexist, racist and tribal ritual requirements that have been spelled
1
out in order for me to be able to enter “safely” on this marae. I am a long-term hi-polling elected representative of all the people of Dunedin and I am not prepared to be dictated to in an official Council meeting by an elite claiming to represent 0.6”7 % of our voting public as detailed in the ward document.” The invitation to confirm co-governance status on this same elite, referred to in the document “Co-design, co-management,” is undemocratic on (sic) my view.”
2
EMAIL MESSAGE 1 BEGINS
Date: Thursday, 12 October 2023 at 6:57 PM
From: Lee Vandervis lee.vandervis@dcc.govt.nz To: Nicola Morand Nicola.Morand@dcc.govt.nz
Cc: (Res) Council Diary res031@dcc.govt.nz, Executive Leadership Team (ELT) elt@dcc.govt.nz, Council 2022-2025 (Elected Members) council.2022-2025@dcc.govt.nz, Edward Ellison […], Donna Matahaere-Atariki […] Rachel Wesley rachel@aukaha.co.nz, […], Megan Potiki […], Matapura Ellison – ALT[…], Emma Wyeth- Exec […], Suzanne Ellison […], Megan Potiki Megan.Potiki@dcc.govt.nz, Marlene McDonald Marlene.McDonald@dcc.govt.nz, Jeanette Wikaira Jeanette.Wikaira@dcc.govt.nz, Sandy Graham Sandy.Graham@dcc.govt.nz, Tessa Thomson Tessa.Thomson@dcc.govt.nz, Tania Williams
Cc: Mandy Mayhem Mandy.Mayhem@dcc.govt.nz, Cherry Lucas Cherry.Lucas@dcc.govt.nz, Marie Laufiso Marie.Laufiso@dcc.govt.nz, Lee Vandervis lee@vandervision.co.nz, Jules Radich Jules.Radich@dcc.govt.nz, Sophie Barker Sophie.Barker@dcc.govt.nz, Kevin Gilbert Kevin.Gilbert@dcc.govt.nz, Andrew Whiley Andrew.Whiley@dcc.govt.nz, Christine Garey Christine.Garey@dcc.govt.nz, Jim O’Malley Jim.OMalley@dcc.govt.nz, Vicky Totoro vicky.totoro@adlnz.org.nz, Office Of The Mayor Office.Mayor@dcc.govt.nz, Brent Weatherall Brent.Weatherall@dcc.govt.nz, David Benson-Pope David.Benson-Pope@dcc.govt.nz, Jesse Matheson Jesse.Matheson@dcc.govt.nz, Ken Tipene Ken.Tipene@dcc.govt.nz
Subject: Te Pae Māori Agenda
Dear All,
I note a Te Pae Maori agenda under our DCC letterhead that does not conform to a normal DCC decision-making agenda as I believe is required under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, particularly Part 7 Local Authority Meetings.
The 3 items on this proposed agenda are devoid of any information, background, discussion, reports, or recommendations, and appear to be non-public without non-public specification.
As such I do not believe that any decisions made under such an agenda can be valid or binding. Please accept my apology for this meeting.
Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis
EMAIL MESSAGE 1 ENDS
3
EMAIL MESSAGE 2 BEGINS
Date: Sunday, 17 October 2023 at 10:05 PM
From: Lee Vandervis lee.vandervis@dcc.govt.nz
To: Sandy Graham Sandy.Graham@dcc.govt.nz
Cc: Sophie Barker sophie.barker@dcc.govt.nz Council 2022-2025 (Elected Members); Jeanette Wikaira
Dear Sandy,
I object to the Te Pae Maori Council agenda presentation lack of translations [again], the compliance requirements for entering this Council Hui meeting at Karitane, the co-governance and leadership references in the Principles that we are invited to agree to, and the no-option presumptive wording in the Maori Ward document that reads “
i) Agrees to a decision to establish a Māori ward prior to November 23, 2023,” when it should read i) Agrees to a decision to establish a Māori ward or not prior to November 23, 2023.
Words that must be translated into English in order for non-Maori speakers to be able to comprehend this future-repercussions Principles document include:
Te Pae Māori
Kāti Puketeraki ki Huirapa Rūnaka
Te Rūnanga o Ōtākou
Mataakwaka
TIMATANGA
WHAKAWHANAUKATAKA
Puketeraki ki Huirapa
TRONT
Manatu Whakaaetaka
mana to mana
whakapapa
Tapu and Noa
Tikaka and kawa
Regarding Karitane admission requirements detailed verbally at last week’s non-public meeting, I am not prepared to submit to the sexist, racist and tribal ritual requirements that have been spelled out in order for me to be able to enter “safely” on this marae.
I am a long-term hi-polling elected representative of all the people of Dunedin and I am not prepared to be dictated to in an official Council meeting by an elite claiming to represent 0.67 % of our voting public as detailed in the ward document.
The invitation to confirm co-governance status on this same elite, referred to in the document “Co-design, co-management,” is undemocratic on (sic) my view.
4
The suggestion that this voting minority’s representatives is confirmed by Council as having the primary “Key Direction –
Māori are leaders in the management of our natural resources and built environment” again supplants Democratic fundamentals and there is no surviving ‘Maori built environment’ for Maori to be leaders in the management of.
In summary, this decision-making hui agenda is not understandable by non-Maori speakers, is being held in a Tribal environment that excludes sovereign non-compliant elected representatives, is anti-Democratic and has a presumptive option to “i) Agrees to a decision to establish a Māori ward prior to November 23, 2023”
Until an understandable agenda is supplied with acceptable attendance criteria, I am not prepared to attend what I see as an inscutable (sic) further extension of the Maori MOU that I voted against as undemocratic at the beginning of this triennium.
Regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis
EMAIL MESSAGE 2 ENDS
5
EMAIL MESSAGE 3 BEGINS
DATE, TIME: TO
FROM SUBJECT LINE: Dear Cam,
3/08/2023, 11:17 AM
Cam McCracken cam.mccracken@dcc.govt.nz, Director DPAG Toitū Lan Yuan & Olveston Lee Vandervis lee@vandervision.co.nz
Inappropriate Maorification of one of our gallery’s most significant artworks
6
As head of our Dunedin Public Art Gallery, I am disappointed to have to ask you to remove the irrelevant Maorified text by Bridget Reweti pictured below beside one of our Gallery’s most significant artworks, Claude Monet’s ‘La Debacle’.
Even more disappointing has been to learn that you have chosen to ignore a similar request from a member of the public over a month ago.
Monet’s famous ‘La Debacle’ painting has no relevance or connection to: Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the Native Land Court, demolishing Maori social systems, or the MP of the time who claimed “we could not devise a more ingenious method of destroying the whole of the Maori race than by these land courts. The natives came from the villages in the interior and have to hang about for months in our centres of population… the result is that a greater number contract our diseases and die.”
Please remove this text promptly and replace it with relevant text commentary/explanation such as this interesting example which first popped up in my internet search of Monet’s famous painting;
*Title: The Break-up of the Ice (La Débâcle or Les Glaçons)
EMAIL MESSAGE 4 BEGINS
SENT: WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2023 6:11:06 PM
From: Lee Vandervis lee@vandervision.co.nz
To: Bill Acklin Bill.Acklin@dcc.govt.nz; Council 2022-2025 (Elected Members) council.2022-2025@dcc.govt.nz; Sandy Graham Sandy.Graham@dcc.govt.nz
Cc: Ken Tipene Ken.Tipene@dcc.govt.nz; Jeanette Wikaira Jeanette.Wikaira@dcc.govt.nz; Robert West Robert.West@dcc.govt.nz; Sharon Bodeker Sharon.Bodeker@dcc.govt.nz
Subject: Re: Waiata prep for Te Pae Maori [- cultural appropriation added by Councillor Vandervis]
Hi Bill,
You say in your email below that “ it is only right that we are able to deliver Waiata…in a formal environment to the best of our ability.”
I disagree.
I believe that it should be optional for elected representatives to sing Amazing Grace, Waiata, The Internationale or any other song as each elected representative sees fit.
I also think learning Te Reo or NZ sign language should be optional, and that all our decision-making should be in plain English, or with proximate English translation, so that everybody knows what ‘other language’ agenda words actually mean.
I reject your claim that it is ‘only right’ to expect elected representatives to sing at all, leave alone in a language that most of us know little of the meaning of.
I am happy for other Councillors to spend our time singing even though I see it as a waste of time, but I am not prepared to submit to what I consider to be cultural appropriation and being expected to go to Waiata School.
Kind regards,
Lee
EMAIL MESSAGE 4 ENDS
7
Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments | Edit
Posted on December 5, 2023 by Lee Vandervis
https://www.bassettbrashandhide.com/post/lord-hannan-equality-the-treaty-and-imported-problems
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Tribalism unmasked and explained | Edit
Posted on November 28, 2023 by Lee Vandervis
| 28 November 2023 Dunedin City Council Chief Executive Officer/Tumu Whakarae Sandy Graham Sandy.Graham@dcc.govt.nz |
Dear Sandy
Notice of motion
1 You have requested legal advice on the notice of motion promoted by Councillor Laufiso, dated 20 November 2023. In particular you have asked whether procedurally this can be considered by Council at its meeting on 28 November 2023.
Legal advice
2 It is our assessment that the notice of motion is now properly included on the agenda. It is the role of Elected Members to consider and vote on the merits of it at their meeting.
3 This is because it is the role of the Mayor to supervise the procedure and decide whether to direct to refuse any proposed notices of motion from being included in the Council agenda. This proposed motion has not been refused by the Mayor following discussion of it and advice from the Chief Executive. It is now for Elected Members to consider this motion and make a decision on it.
Reasons
4 A notice of motion is a means by which any Elected Member can have a proposed motion included on Council’s agenda. This is addressed under clause 26.1 of the Dunedin City Council Standing Orders. This requires notice of an intended motion to be in writing, signed by the mover, stating the meeting at which it is intended to be considered and delivered to the Chief Executive at least five clear working days before that meeting. Having reviewed the notice by Councillor Laufiso, we consider that it satisfies these procedural requirements. We note it was accepted by you as Chief Executive and was considered to comply with this procedure.
5 There is a discretion in clause 26.2 of the Standing Orders for the Chairperson (here the Mayor) to direct the Chief Executive to refuse to include a proposed notice of motion on the agenda. Clause 26.2 sets out criteria which may justify the Chairperson to refuse any notice of motion in their discretion.
6 We note from your instructions that upon receiving the notice of motion you took advice on it from the Governance team, then advised the Mayor. The Mayor has not made any direction to you as Chief Executive to refuse to accept the notice of motion. This means that the proposed motion has not been refused and has rightly been included on the agenda for Elected Members to consider and vote on.
7 It is clear that this proposed notice of motion is a matter of high political interest at the present time. In this context of a proposed motion on a political topic, we are satisfied that the Mayor having not refused the motion has made a decision reasonably available to him.
8 We have ourselves now assessed the grounds in clause 26.2 of the Standing Orders. We note that it is the exclusive role of the Mayor to form a judgement about whether any of these criteria are met to inform the exercise of the Mayor’s discretion. The context of that evaluation here is that this matter is of high political interest with limited alternative options, and limited implications (if any) for Council workload or budgets.
| 9 We comment below on the more relevant grounds in clause 26.2. We are satisfied that the notice of motion does not obviously contravene any of the criteria that ought to justify the Chairperson to refuse the notice of motion for procedural reasons. In particular: 10 It is for Elected Members to evaluate as part of their decision whether they have a sense of the views of persons likely to be affected or have an interest in the matter. It is for the Mayor to exercise a discretion to control the procedure about whether a notice of motion such as this goes on the Council agenda. Having not directed the Chief Executive to refuse this notice of motion, we consider it has now passed this procedural point and it is for the Elected Members collectively to consider the notice of motion, debate it, and vote on it as proposed. Yours faithfully nderson Lloyd |
| Michael Garbett Partner |
| d +64 3 467 7173 m +64 27 668 9752 e michael.garbett@al.nz |
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment | Edit
Posted on November 28, 2023 by Lee Vandervis
It appears that Mayor Radich has approved the addition of the Palestinian flag Notice of Motion being added to tomorrow’s DCC full Council agenda, and is too busy in China Sister City sight-seeing to respond to my email as below, leaving Deputy Mayor Lucas to deal with the fall-out.
The subsequent dropping of the inflammatory ‘fly the Palestinian flag from Mayor’s balcony and other City buildings’ motion in favour of NZ flag at half-mast helped defuse this waste of local government focus and time.
From: Lee Vandervis lee@vandervision.co.nz
Date: Sunday, 26 November 2023 at 11:30 PM
To: Mayor mayor@dcc.govt.nz, Council 2022-2025 (Elected Members) council.2022-2025@dcc.govt.nz, Sandy Graham Sandy.Graham@dcc.govt.nz, Robert West Robert.West@dcc.govt.nz
Subject: Palestinian flag-raising notice of motion
Dear Mr Mayor,
Re Cr. Laufiso’s Notice of motion part 2 calling for agreement “to the City’s flying of the Palestinian flag on November 29th on the Mayor’s balcony and other city buildings, the UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, as a tangible and visible symbol of support to our local Palestinian community.”
I believe you should refuse this notice of motion as Chairperson of Tuesday’s meeting under Standing Orders Section 26.2:
“(a) is disrespectful …“ [and indeed abhorrent] to a sizeable proportion of our Dunedin community.
and “(b) is not related to the role or functions of the local authority or the meeting concerned;”
The role of the DCC is not to purchase flags to fly from city buildings and the Mayor’s balcony to show solidarity for just one side of an international conflict.
[I note that Cr. Laufiso is as publicly avowed communist who, if this transgression of Standing Orders is allowed, would then also be able to call for the flying of the Russian flag from your balcony and city buildings in solidarity with the military invaders of Ukraine.]
and “(e) fails to satisfy sufficient information as to satisfy the decision-making provisions of s.77-82 LGA 2002;
Cr. Laufiso’s notice of motion fails to provide any information, leave alone sufficient information to satisfy any elected representatives’ decision to show solidarity with just one side of the Israel/Palestinian/Hamas conflict.
Your powers as Chairperson of this meeting are sufficient on any of the counts (a), (b), and (e) of DCC Standing Orders above to simply refuse the entire notice of motion in my view, and I intend to propose that this be done upon the confirmation of the agenda, if you do not use your Chairperson’s authority to refuse the notice of motion prior to Tuesday’s meeting.
I believe that in this way we can maintain an orderly and relevant meeting without having to consider a disrespectful ‘solidarity’ motion with one particular side of an international conflict that lacks sufficient information, and is outside of our functions as a NZ local government Council.
Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis
·
Shared with Public
Doug Kamo’s production of Rock Tenors Pink Floyd hits was superb in St Paul’s Cathedral last night.
There is a potential industry here in Dunedin with so much local talent, musical and technical.
Thank you all for a wonderful memorable night.
Lee Vandervis - lee@vandervision.co.nz 
