Komiti Whakahaere ā-Ture /

Regulatory Committee

 

OPEN MINUTES

 

 

 

Minutes of a meeting of the Regulatory Committee held remotely on Tuesday, 9 November 2021 at 10.00am and can be viewed on the Auckland Council website https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/how-auckland-council-works/meetings-council-bodies/Pages/webcasts-council-meetings.aspx.

 

 

present

 

Chairperson

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Josephine Bartley

 

Members

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

 

 

Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore

 

 

Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins

 

 

Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

 

 

Cr Shane Henderson

 

 

Cr Daniel Newman, JP

 

 

Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM

 

 

IMSB Chair David Taipari

From 10.12am, Item 5

 

Member Glenn Wilcox

 

 

Cr Paul Young

 

 

ABSENT

 

Ex-Officio

Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

 

 

Cr Efeso Collins

 

 

 


Regulatory Committee

09 November 2021

 

 

Note:   a roll-call was conducted that ascertained the following members were in attendance at the commencement of the meeting.

Cr L Cooper

ü

IMSB Chair David Taipari

 

Cr J Bartley

ü

IMSB Member Glenn Wilcox

ü

Cr C Casey

 

Cr S Stewart

ü

Cr E Collins (apology)

 

Cr P Young

ü

Cr S Henderson

ü

Mayor P Goff (apology)

 

Cr D Newman

ü

Deputy Mayor B Cashmore

ü

 

 

 

1          Apologies

 

Resolution number REG/2021/71

MOVED by Cr L Cooper, seconded by Cr S Henderson:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         accept the apology from Cr Efeso Collins for absence, ISMB David Taipari for lateness and Mayor Phil Goff for absence on council business.

CARRIED

 

 

 

2          Declaration of Interest

 

There were no declarations of interest.

 

 

3          Confirmation of Minutes

 

Resolution number REG/2021/72

MOVED by Cr L Cooper, seconded by Cr S Henderson:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 12 October 2021, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

CARRIED

 

 

4          Petitions

 

There were no petitions.

 


 

 

5

Public Input – Dr Grant Hewison - Item 8 - Alcohol Licensing Annual Report 2020-2021

 

IMSB Chair David Taipari entered the meeting at 10.12am.

 

Dr Grant Hewison – Communities Against Alcohol Harm Inc, Mereana Peka – Chair, Turehou Māori Wardens and Thomas Henry – Māori Warden, Tamaki Makaurau were in attendance to speak with the committee.

 

Resolution number REG/2021/73

MOVED by Cr C Casey, seconded by Cr J Bartley:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         receive public input from and thank Dr Grant Hewison – Communities Against Alcohol Harm Inc, Mereana Peka – Chair, Turehou Māori Wardens and Thomas Henry – Māori Warden, Tamaki Makaurau for their presentations regarding Item 8 - Alcohol Licensing Annual Report 2020-2021.

CARRIED

 

 

6          Local Board Input

 

There was no local board input.

 

 

7          Extraordinary Business

 

There was no extraordinary business.

 

 

8

Alcohol Licensing Annual Report 2020-2021

 

Note:   changes were made to the original recommendation with a new clause c) being added as a Chair’s recommendation.

 

Resolution number REG/2021/74

MOVED by Cr C Casey, seconded by Cr P Young:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)      receive the report.

b)      note that aspects of the report have been sent to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Committee in accordance with section 199 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 as part of the District Licensing Committee’s annual report.  That report is published on the Auckland Council website.

c)      agree that Councillors Bartley and Collins work with Alcohol Licensing staff and advocate to central government on the concerns raised by Communities Against Alcohol Harm in relation to remote sales and deliveries urging that these be addressed in the review of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol  Act 2012.

CARRIED

 

 

 


 

 

9

Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 9 November 2021

 

Resolution number REG/2021/75

MOVED by Cr L Cooper, seconded by IMSB Chair D Taipari:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)      receive the Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 9 November 2021

CARRIED

 

 

10

Summary of Regulatory Committee Information - updates, memos and briefings - 9 November 2021

 

Resolution number REG/2021/76

MOVED by Cr L Cooper, seconded by Deputy Mayor BC Cashmore:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)      note the progress on the forward work programme appended as Attachment A of the agenda report.

b)      receive the summary of Regulatory Committee Information – updates, memos and briefings – 9 November 2021.

CARRIED

 

 

Note:   The Chair accorded precedence to Item 12 - Determination of Objection Against Disqualification of Dog Owner – Gillfedder at this time.

 

 

12

Determination of Objection Against Disqualification of Dog Owner - Gillfedder

 

The hearing commenced at 10.53am in relation to the objection against the disqualification of dog owner.

The objector was not present at the hearing.

Chrisna Nortje – Animal Management Principal Specialist, Elly Waitoa – Manager Animal Management, and David Baikie – Senior Animal Management Officer addressed the committee and outlined the disqualification of dog owner. and responded to questions.

The hearing concluded at 11.20am.

 

 

11

Objection to stormwater works at 75 Kitchener Road, Milford – 12 Crete Avenue, Milford

 

Resolution number REG/2021/77

MOVED by Cr D Newman, seconded by IMSB Chair D Taipari:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         agree that Item 11: Objection to stormwater works at 75 Kitchener Road, Milford – 12 Crete Avenue, Milford be deferred until the next meeting of the Regulatory Committee Scheduled to be held on Tuesday, 14 December 2021 at 10am.

CARRIED

 

Note:   Item 12 - Determination of Objection Against Disqualification of Dog Owner – Gillfedder was considered prior to Item 11 - Objection to stormwater works at 75 Kitchener Road, Milford – 12 Crete Avenue, Milford.

 

13

Objection to Nuisance Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham

 

The hearing commenced at 11.24am in relation to the objection against the noise abatement notice (Dasher).

Dennisa Davidson and Dominic Davidson on behalf of the objector were in attendance and addressed the committee, outlined the noise abatement notice and responded to questions.

Chrisna Nortje – Animal Management Principal Specialist, Debbie Lawrie – Senior Bark Advisor, and Janet Larsen – Bark Advisor addressed the committee and outlined the noise abatement notice and responded to questions.

The objector was given the opportunity to reply to the matters raised by the council and provide the committee with final comments.

The hearing concluded at 12.12pm.

 

Attachments

a     9 November 2021, Regulatory Committee, Item 13 - Objection to Noise Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham - Supporting Document 1

b     9 November 2021, Regulatory Committee, Item 13 - Objection to Noise Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham - Supporting Document 2

c    9 November 2021, Regulatory Committee, Item 13 - Objection to Noise Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham - Supporting Document 3

d    9 November 2021, Regulatory Committee, Item 13 - Objection to Noise Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham - Supporting Document 4

e     9 November 2021, Regulatory Committee, Item 13 - Objection to Noise Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham - Supporting Document 5

f     9 November 2021, Regulatory Committee, Item 13 - Objection to Noise Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham - Supporting Document 6

 

 

 

Procedural motion to exclude the public

Resolution number REG/2021/78

MOVED by Cr L Cooper, seconded by Deputy Mayor BC Cashmore:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

 

 

 

 

12        Determination of Objection Against Disqualification of Dog Owner – Gillfedder

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of

the information is necessary

to enable the local authority

to carry on, without prejudice

or disadvantage, negotiations

(including commercial and

industrial negotiations).

 

In particular, the

deliberations of the decision

could compromise the

council in undertaking

without prejudice

negotiations of this objection

pursuant to section 33A of

the Dog Control Act 1996

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

 

13        Objection to Nuisance Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of

the information is necessary

to enable the local authority

to carry on, without prejudice

or disadvantage, negotiations

(including commercial and

industrial negotiations).

 

In particular, the

deliberations of the decision

could compromise the

council in undertaking

without prejudice

negotiations of this objection

pursuant to section 33A of

the Dog Control Act 1996

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

CARRIED

 

 

12.13pm          The public was excluded.

 

 

Resolutions in relation to the confidential items are recorded in the confidential section of these minutes and are not publicly available.

 

 

1.14pm            The public was re-admitted.

 


 

 

RESTATEMENTS

 

It was resolved while the public was excluded:

 

12

Determination of Objection Against Disqualification of Dog Owner - Gillfedder

 

Resolution number REG/2021/78

MOVED by Cr L Cooper, seconded by Cr C Casey:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         hear and determine the objection.

b)         uphold the disqualification but bring the date of termination forward to 1 October 2022.

Restatement

c)         agree that the matter remain confidential until the conclusion of the hearing and then be restated in the open minutes.

CARRIED

 

Reason for decision:

 

Under section 25(1)(a) of the Dog Control Act 1996 a territorial authority must disqualify a person from being an owner of a dog if that person commits 3 or more infringement offences (not relating to a single incident or occasion) within a continuous period of 24 months. 

 

The objection notice denied responsibility for all of the infringement notices issued to the objector.  However, staff advised that the objector did not dispute the infringement notices at the time they were issued, as was his right. However this hearing is not the forum to challenge the infringements that were issued, which the objector had a right to do at the time, but choose not to exercise. The Committee notes that the objector did not attend the objection hearing and therefore no evidence was present in support of the objection.

 

The Committee is satisfied that the statutory test in s25(1)(a) has been met and the objector should be disqualified from owning a dog and in reaching this conclusion has considered:

·         The circumstances and nature of the offences: The objector failed to confine his dogs on his property which has created a nuisance as well as a risk to the community and other animals, the safety of road users, and his dogs.

·         The competency of the objector in terms of responsible dog ownership: The objector was educated on his obligation to confine his dogs and warned that he may be disqualified as a dog owner but further infringement offences were committed.

·         Steps taken by the owner to prevent further offences: The objector did not provide any information on this as he denied liability for all offences.

·         The matters advanced in support of the objection: The objector did not provide any information on this in his objection other than to deny responsibility.

·         Any other relevant matters: The objector has refused to accept responsibility for any offending.

 

The Committee has accepted the advice of staff that a 5 year disqualification period should be reserved for the most serious offenders and offending history. The offences in this case were not at the highest end of the range and therefore the disqualification period should be reduced to 3 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

13

Objection to Nuisance Abatement Notice by Yuvaraj Davidson Thyagarajan Abraham

 

That the motion was put in parts.

Note:   clauses a) and c) were put.

 

Resolution number REG/2021/79

MOVED by Cr L Cooper, seconded by Member G Wilcox: 

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         hear and determine the objection to the nuisance abatement notice by Mr Davidson.

Restatement

b)        agree that the matter remain confidential until the conclusion of the hearing and then be restated in the open minutes.

CARRIED

 

Resolution number REG/2021/80

MOVED by Cr L Cooper, seconded by Member G Wilcox:  

That the Regulatory Committee:

c)         uphold and modify the nuisance abatement notice to terminate on the 14 December 2021

A division was called for, voting on which was as follows:

For

Cr C Casey

Deputy Mayor BC Cashmore

Cr L Cooper

Cr S Stewart

Member G Wilcox

Cr P Young

Against

Cr J Bartley

Cr S Henderson

Cr D Newman

IMSB Chair D Taipari

Abstained

 

The motion was declared carried by 6 votes to 4.

 

CARRIED

 

Reason for decision:

 

The Committee is satisfied that the objector’s dog has been barking in a persistent and loud manner.

 

The objector did not deny that their dog barked, but rather submitted that there were periods where the dog did not bark and therefore the barking was not persistent.

 

The Committee considers that the definition of persistent barking includes continually recurring barking despite there being periods of no barking. For example, if a dog only barks when its owner leaves the property, the barking can still be persistent despite their being long periods where the owner is home and no barking occurs.  This type of barking can still be a nuisance to neighbours.

 

The objector did not allege that the barking was not loud.  German Shepherds are a breed known to have loud barks.

 

The objector gave evidence that the dog was only walked 2-3 times per week and that the owner and his family are very busy people and often away from the house for from 7am to 9pm or later.  The Committee consider that this is insufficient exercise for a large dog and long periods of absence likely contributed to the barking nuisance.  This is supported by the objector’s evidence that the dog is now being walked daily (sometimes more than once a day) and that combined with other interventions including a bark collar has resulted in a change of behaviour and no further bark complaints.  Staff agree that the barking situation has improved, however, this only occurred after the nuisance abatement notice was issued and steps were taken to address the behaviour.

 

While there may be some inconsistencies in the recollection of the complainant, that is not uncommon and it does not follow that the complainant is intentionally misleading officers, malicious or that there was no reasonable basis for staff to issue the notice. The Committee do not accept the objector’s allegations against the complainant.

 

For these reasons, the Committee consider that there is evidence of persistent and loud barking and that the nuisance abatement notice was validly issued. However, as the dog’s behaviour has improved and there have been no further complaints, the Committee consider would be reasonable to reduce the period of the abatement notice so that it ends on 14 December 2021.

 

 

 

 

 

14        Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 

There was no consideration of extraordinary items.

 

 

 

 

1.14pm                                               The Chairperson thanked Members for their attendance and attention to business and declared the meeting closed.

 

CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Regulatory Committee HELD ON

 

 

 

DATE:.........................................................................

 

 

 

CHAIRPERSON:.......................................................