Range Road Information – Page 2 – Paluma

Recently, David Roveda wrote to TMR asking them for information relating to the tenders that have been invited for work on repairing the damage to the Range Road. His questions are highly relevant to the broader Paluma community and its concerns about timelines for full opeing of the range road. David has suggested that the resulting exchange be published on Paluma.org. In David’s words:

“This started out with a simple request to get a copy of the tender documents which I have outlined the reasons for this in the most recent email below…Not an unreasonable request I would have thought but it seems like TMR are throwing all sorts of obstacles in the way. I smell a rat!! Interesting to note that they use Transparency and Ethics as a reason to not provide any details.”

From: David Roveda
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 2:23 PM
To: Engagement Northern <engagement.northern@tmr.qld.gov.au>
Subject: Re: Request for Tender Documents – Mount Spec Road

Without Prejudice, Save as to Costs

Hello Clare

As a concerned resident and owner of a small business in Paluma (and tax payer I might add), there are a number of reasons why I would like to have access to the tender documents for the Mount Spec Road project as I believe it may contain answers to several important and relevant questions. They include but are not restricted to the following:

The expected duration of the project. When is the date for practical completion. Is there an expectation that the project completion and therefore the reopening of the road will not occur in the next 6 months? 12 months? 18 months?? Is the road likely to reopen to the public prior to the project completion. Will the road stay open to permit holders during the day with most of the work occurring at night. Has any thought been given to closing the road to all traffic during the work program in an effort to speed up work as well as avoiding dangerous working conditions during the night.
The actual scope of work. Is the planned project work only expected to repair and restore the road to the pre-February condition or is there an expectation that the road will be improved to at least 21st century safety standards for a public road. Is there provision for road widening, parking or turning bays at strategic locations and placement of safety barriers where there is a risk of vehicles going over steep embankments.
What constraints will the successful tenderer be working under in regard to Environmental and Heritage guidelines. As an example, will blanket approval be allowed for foliage removal during the process or will it be on a case by case, location by location requirement. Will repairs to relatively insignificant heritage areas be stifled and rendered overly complicated and therefore become costly and time consuming issues.

These and several other questions were raised at the TMR meeting 9^th July 2025 and to date, none have been satisfactorily answered. Perhaps now would be a good time.

Sincerely

David Roveda

From: Engagement Northern <engagement.northern@tmr.qld.gov.au>
Sent: Friday, August 8, 2025 9:46 AM
To: David Roveda
Subject: RE: Request for Tender Documents – Mount Spec Road

Good morning David

Thank you for your email dated 29 July 2025 regarding your request for access to the tender documents for the Mount Spec Road project.

We would like to provide further clarification as to why your request has been declined.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) follows the Transport Infrastructure Project Delivery System (TIPDS), which is designed to ensure value for money in the delivery of infrastructure projects. TIPDS provides comprehensive guidance on procurement processes, including:

Developing the most appropriate delivery strategy
Procedures for calling, compiling, and assessing tenders
Determining eligibility criteria for tenderers.

As outlined in TIPDS Volume 2, Section 6.6.1, districts now utilise the QBuild eTender system. This platform is specifically designed to allow only prequalified tenderers, at or above the required levels, to access tender documents. This ensures that only suppliers with the appropriate capability and expertise are invited to tender.

The tendering process, whether through single/sole invitation, restricted, or open tender, forms the basis of engagement and contract formation between the principal and suppliers. As a government agency, TMR is bound by the Queensland Procurement Policy, which mandates that all procurement activities be conducted in an ethical, transparent, and confidential manner to ensure value for money for the public.

Allowing access to tender documents by parties who are not prequalified would compromise several key principles of the procurement process, including:

Confidentiality – Protecting the integrity of the contract between the principal and suppliers
Transparency and Ethics – Ensuring fair and unbiased decision-making
Efficiency – Maintaining the timeframe allocated for the procurement process

Restricted tenders are specifically designed to target suppliers who meet the required qualifications and capabilities. This approach not only ensures the suitability of participants but also streamlines the evaluation process and expedites contract award.

It is not standard or ethical practice to involve non-prequalified parties in the tendering process. However, general members of the public may request information about the engagement through a formal information request after the contract has been awarded.

We trust this explanation clarifies the basis for our decision. Should you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to reach out.

Kind regards,

Clare
Customer and Stakeholder Management Team – Northern District, North Queensland Region

From: David Roveda
Sent: Tuesday, 29 July 2025 3:12 PM
To: Engagement Northern <engagement.northern@tmr.qld.gov.au>
Subject: Re: Request for Tender Documents – Mount Spec Road

Clare,

I acknowledge receipt of your notification refusing my request for a copy of the Tender documents promulgated on 14/7/25 in respect of Mt Spec Road repair contracts , which is the public access to my business in Paluma village which has been closed to Mt Spec Road travelers since 1/2/25 and which has thereby caused my business to be closed through lack of customers who formerly used the Mt Spec Road to visit my business . ( “ my locus standi”)

Please advise & provide the following details in relation to the TMR Decision to refuse my request to be given a copy of the TMR tender advertisement document :

( a) The full name of the TMR Decision Maker ( delegate or otherwise)

( b) The date of the aforesaid Decision.

(c) The legislative authority relied upon by TMR to refuse my request.

( d) A copy of the TMR Decision Maker’s written file record of the said Decision .

David Roveda
Mt Spec Road
Paluma.

From: Engagement Northern <engagement.northern@tmr.qld.gov.au>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2025 1:41 PM
To: David Roveda
Subject: RE: Request for Tender Documents – Mount Spec Road

Good afternoon David,

While we understand that this information will be of interest to people, the tender documents have been restricted to pre-qualified contractors as this provides confidence to TMR that suitably qualified contractors are being engaged to undertake the works. As the works are challenging both technically and due to site conditions, TMR believes that this is the best option.

Please be assured that we will communicate any updates to the community as soon as information becomes available.

Kind regards,

Clare
Customer and Stakeholder Management Team – Northern District | North Queensland Region

From: David Roveda
Sent: Monday, 28 July 2025 5:52 PM
To: Engagement Northern <engagement.northern@tmr.qld.gov.au>
Subject: Re: Request for Tender Documents – Mount Spec Road

Hi Clare,

Is there any reason why this particular tender is currently restricted to pre-qualified contractors?

I would have thought it would be in the public interest to have open access.

Is there any reason why the scope of works has not already been communicated to the community given that it must already be outlined in the tender documents. I would like to take this opportunity to remind you that I am one of a number of businesses in the area who have not been able reopen since 1^st February 2025 due to the road closure.

It is imperative that we have some idea what is going on or at least planned to go on so that we can make informed LIFE DECISIONS. We are receiving no on going financial assistance while our business remains closed and we need to know now whether we continue to live in hope or do we permanently close the business…

Sincerely

David Roveda

From: Engagement Northern <engagement.northern@tmr.qld.gov.au>
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2025 1:52 PM
To: David Roveda
Subject: Request for Tender Documents – Mount Spec Road

Good afternoon David,

The Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) has received your request for the Mount Spec Road tender documents. Please note that this particular tender is currently restricted to pre-qualified contractors, and as such, we are unable to issue the documents to you at this time.

TMR will provide an update to the community regarding the commencement and scope of works once the tender process has been completed and submissions have been reviewed.

We appreciate your enquiry and your interest in the project.

Kind regards,
Clare

This is a very informative comment posted on June 5th from one of our Paluma homeowners, Tony Bligh, which was a ‘comment’ on the post ‘2nd letter to the minister regarding range road permits’. It is very bad news indeed for our business owners in particular as well as ALL residents.

Folks the following is long because it encompasses a conversation of over an hour I had yesterday with a TMR engineer and one of the department’s communications people. They were endeavouring to explain TMR’s perspective and approach to me, and I spent my time pointing out their inconsistencies, illogicality and failings. It was polite but brutally frank. Jamie’s post brilliantly describes the failures in TMR’s thinking, so I need not go over that again.It will not surprise you to learn that TMR did not want to open the road, and had no intention of doing so. Apparently an edict from the Director-General compelled them to open it now. I was advised that that direction caused a hasty implementation and “limited consultation”. Self-evidently the implementation has been hasty and inept, so I accept that part of the advice. Long experience with TMR causes me to be very, very dubious about the claim that more time would have led to better (any!!) consultation…They appeared genuinely surprised when I told them that many Paluma home owners view our Paluma home as our “real” residence, and a Townsville house as just a place to sleep while we wait to get back up the mountain. It seems that they viewed all “weekenders” as little more than casual tourists, and could not understand the depth of outrage many of us felt at the inequitable permit arrangements.They made it clear that very large portions of the slopes above the road are unstable, and the experts believe that more slips will occur, potentially rendering the road entirely unfixable (my words, but they did not disagree).The good news – and I reiterate that this is entirely based on what they told me – is:
1. The traffic count of users of existing permits has been well within TMR’s (self-) adopted limits.
2. Consequentially, they anticipate issuing more permits “very soon”, but gave no detail about when, or how the recipients will be identified.
3. They have adopted a new process in an attempt to engage contractors to have to full rectification of the road carried out more quickly.The (very) bad news:
4. Permit arrangements are expected to remain in place until full rectification is completed. (They might allow some progressive relaxation as work is completed, but that discussion was unclear).
5. The heritage-listing of the road, coupled with the requirements of the Wet Tropics management Authority, greatly increases the cost of and time required for future works. It also (in TMR’s view) prevents TMR from improving the road and making it more resilient. (I believe that the Paluma community should discuss asap what we want to propose about at least the QLD Heritage listing).
6. TMR would not actually comment on the time required for a full re-opening, but they did not disagree with me when I said that, given the scale of the work and the impediments just described, it would be at least 12 months and probably longer.
7. They were very clear about expecting to close the road to all users during heavy rain periods, and on any other occasion they thought a slip was more likely. While they did not state the following explicitly, it seemed to me that they expect to close the road for (at least) some time during the next wet season, and during any earlier periods of serious rain. (Stock up on your provisions!).
8. The day-time travel restriction is the result of geo-technical advice that states that travel should occur only when drivers can see any slippage of the slopes above the road. That is, the restriction is not really focussing on the visibility of the actual road way. You can form your own views about any driver’s likelihood of driving the range road while also trying to look through the roof of their vehicle and around a blind corner to see the start of a landslide on a slope above the road. For myself, I reckon that if I ever see one, that will give me just enough time to kiss my butt goodbye…Good luck, Tony