I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 5 December 2023

10.00am

Room 1, Level 26
135 Albert Street
Auckland

 

Komiti mō te Waeture me te Haumaru ā-Hapori / Regulatory and Community Safety Committee

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Josephine Bartley

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Ken Turner

 

Members

IMSB Member Edward Ashby

 

 

Cr Julie Fairey

 

 

Cr Alf Filipaina, MNZM

 

 

IMSB Member Tony Kake, MNZM

 

 

Cr Mike Lee

 

 

Cr Kerrin Leoni

 

 

Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM

 

Ex-officio

Mayor Wayne Brown

 

 

Deputy Mayor Desley Simpson, JP

 

 

(Quorum 5 members)

 

 

 

Sam Riddiford

Governance Advisor

 

30 November 2023

 

Contact Telephone: 027 305 1871

Email: sam.riddiford@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 

 


Regulatory and Community Safety Committee

05 December 2023

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS            PAGE

1          Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies                                                                            5

2          Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest         5

3          Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes                                        5

4          Ngā Petihana | Petitions                                                                5

4.1    Petition: Relocate Atlas Concrete Silverdale Recycling Plant from Residential Area                                                 5  

5          Ngā Kōrero a te Marea | Public Input                                           6

5.1    Public Input: Callum Gillispie and Bronwyn Coers  - Navigation Bylaw 2021 Amendment                                   6

6          Ngā Kōrero a te Poari ā-Rohe Pātata | Local Board Input         6

7          Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business                               6

8          New Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw Control       7

9          Summary of Regulatory and Community Safety Committee information memoranda, workshops, and briefings (including the Forward Work Programme) - 5 December 2023                 17

10        Determination of Objection against Disqualification of Dog Owner Jarrod Sykes                                                                    19

11        Te Whakaaro ki ngā Take Pūtea e Autaia ana | Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 

 


1          Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

 

 

2          Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

 

 

3          Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

 

            Click the meeting date below to access the minutes.

 

That the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee:

a)           whakaū / confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 7 November 2023, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

 

4          Ngā Petihana | Petitions

 

4.1       Petition: Relocate Atlas Concrete Silverdale Recycling Plant from Residential Area

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.      To present a petition to the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.      Michaela Back will present a petition to the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee. The petition reads:

Petition Prayer:

We are writing to request the relocation of the Atlas Concrete Recycling Plant from the residential area.

Atlas Concrete misled the community by concealing its plan to operate a recycling plant near residential areas. The excessive noise, dust and vibrations coming from crushing and moving the concrete have had a detrimental impact on our health and quality of life of near residents.

The council also failed to fulfil its responsibilities adequately by not consulting or seeking any input from residents directly impacted before granting the resource consent. Exposure to concrete dust over extended periods poses potential health risks. Moreover, the giant concrete wall is not only intimidating but also presents a safety hazard during heavy rain. Our community deserves to breathe clean air and live in an environment that prioritises public health and safety. We appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee:

a)      whakamihi / thank Michaela Back for attending the meeting

b)      whiwhi / receive the petition in relation to the Atlas Concrete Recycling Plant.

 

 

 

 

5          Ngā Kōrero a te Marea | Public Input

 

5.1       Public Input: Callum Gillispie and Bronwyn Coers  - Navigation Bylaw 2021 Amendment

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.      Callum Gillespie (Chief Executive Officer, Coastguard NZ) and Bronwyn Coers (Strategy and Implementation Manager, Wai Ora Tamaki Makaurau (WOTM), Drowning Prevention Auckland) will address the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee on the Navigation Bylaw 2021 Amendment.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.      This committee is responsible for regulatory hearings (required by relevant legislation), regulatory policy and bylaws and is responsible for overseeing improvement of the Council’s regulatory functions and making certain regulatory decisions that are appropriate to be made by elected members.

3.      Through public input the committee is able field the concerns of individuals and groups to help inform decision making related to matters before the committee.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee:

a)      whiwhi / receive the public input from Callum Gillespie and Bronwyn Coers and whakamihi / thank them for attending the meeting.

 

 

 

 

6          Ngā Kōrero a te Poari ā-Rohe Pātata | Local Board Input

 

 

 

7          Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business

 

 


Regulatory and Community Safety Committee

05 December 2023

 

 

New Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw Control

File No.: CP2023/16355

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.      To adopt a new waste management and minimisation bylaw control about the storage and deposit of waste associated with kerbside collections.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.      To ensure council rules about how waste collected from public places (kerbside collections) is stored and deposited are up to date, staff have reviewed the rules contained in two bylaw controls contained in the Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2019 (WMM 2019 bylaw).

3.      The ‘Containers for Kerbside Collection Control’ and ‘Separation of Domestic Waste Control’ have been unchanged since they were introduced in the Solid Waste Bylaw 2012. The controls prescribe rules that relate to what people can place in refuse and recycling bins/bags, times to place a bin/bag on the kerbside, and the maximum weight of waste that can be placed in bins/bags.

4.      The Regulatory and Community Safety Committee has delegated authority from the Governing Body to decide controls (GB/2022/112).

5.      Staff undertook a review of these two controls in 2023. The review was triggered by central government changes to standardise kerbside recycling services across the country which comes into force from 1 February 2024, and to address operational concerns with the two controls since the adoption of the Waste Management Minimisation Bylaw 2019. Operational concerns included maximum bin weights that are no longer fit for purpose with smaller food scrap bins, and bin/bag set out times specified by commercial, urban and rural areas which were not defined.

6.      The review findings highlighted the current controls are out-of-date and require improvement, including changes to align with government regulation, see Table 2. Staff assessed two options - Option 1 status quo and Option 2 new control, with Option 2 being the most appropriate response to the review findings, see Table 3. Staff then developed a new control (Attachment A) in response to the findings and options.

7.      Staff recommend that the committee agree to the findings, endorse Option 2, adopt the new control in Attachment A to commence from 1 February 2024, and then revoke the current controls that apply to people using kerbside collection services on 1 February 2024. Controls that apply to waste collectors under the Waste Bylaw would remain.

8.      Taking this approach will help the council to better manage and minimise waste, protect the public from health and safety risks and nuisance, manage the use of council-controlled public places, and better align with the Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2019 and new government standards for council kerbside collections. This approach also allows for the continued transition of rules that apply to waste collectors to new and renewed waste collection licences.


 

 

9.      There is a minor reputational risk that iwi, local boards or members of the public or industry may feel they have not had an opportunity to have their say on the new control. This can be mitigated by communicating that the new control aligns with the government requirement for standardised collections which was publicly consulted and that other changes are operational having positive impacts to public and waste collectors. Lastly  community views obtained from previous public consultations were considered in the development of the recommended changes to the controls.

10.    There are no financial implications to the council in adopting the new control.

11.    If approved, staff will update the bylaw controls on the council website, carryout a communications campaign to address the changes from government’s standardising kerbside collections, inform waste collectors and transition rules that apply to waste collectors in the current controls to new and renewed licences.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee:

a)      whakaae / agree to the key finding that the current 2012 Auckland Council’s Containers for Kerbside Collection Control and Separation of Domestic Waste Control are out-of-date and require improvement.

b)      ohia / endorse that a new control is the most appropriate option to manage and minimise waste, protect the public, and to manage the use of public places associated with the storage and deposit of waste for kerbside collection as detailed in Option 2 of this agenda report.

c)      whai / adopt the new Auckland Council Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw (Collections) Control 2023 in Attachment A of this agenda report with effect from 1 February 2024.

d)      whakakore / revoke on 1 February 2024, the ‘Separation of Domestic Waste Control’ saved under clause 31(3) of the Auckland Council Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2019.

e)      whakakore / revoke on 1 February 2024, rules in the ‘Containers for Kerbside Collection Control’ saved under clause 31(3) of the Auckland Council Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2019 that apply to people using a kerbside collection service. For the avoidance of doubt, rules that apply to waste collectors are retained.

f)       tuku mana / delegate authority through the Chief Executive to the General Manager responsible for Waste Solutions to make any amendments to the control in Attachment A of this agenda report to correct any errors or omissions and add a te reo Māori title to the control.

Horopaki

Context

Council uses a bylaw and bylaw controls to manage and minimise waste

12.    The Governing Body adopted Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Whakahaere me te Whakaiti Tuku Para 2019, the Auckland Council Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2019 (WMM 2019 bylaw) on 22 August 2019 (GB/2019/83).

13.    The WMM 2019 bylaw supports Auckland’s Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 (waste plan 2018) by managing and minimising waste, protecting the public from health and safety risks and nuisance, and by managing the use of council-controlled public places.


 

 

14.    The WMM 2019 bylaw contains general rules for how people may store and deposit waste for collection from public places (‘kerbside collection’) in clause 7 of the bylaw. The detail for each general rule is prescribed in a bylaw control. Clause 19 of the WMM 2019 bylaw allows a control to be made under delegated authority in a separate document, instead of ‘in the bylaw’.

15.    The council uses bylaw controls in several of its bylaws as an effective and efficient way to maintain rules that may be location specific (for example alcohol bans) or activity specific (for example keeping chickens). Table 1 below provides an example of how controls relating to kerbside collections can be used to implement the general rules in the bylaw.

            Table 1. Example of bylaw and bylaw control rule for kerbside collection

Bylaw general rule

Bylaw control detailed rules

18.    That waste must be placed:

·    in an approved container

·    at certain times

·    at certain locations.

19.    That refuse for collection must be placed:

·    in an approved refuse bin or bag

·    no earlier than 5pm of the day before scheduled collection

·    as close as practicable to the roadway edge without obstructing any footpath, bus stop, cycle path or shared path.

16.    Currently the WMM 2019 bylaw has two controls for kerbside collections, the Containers for Kerbside Collection Control and the Separation of Domestic Waste Control.

17.    Both controls were made under the Auckland Council Solid Waste Bylaw 2012, by the then Regional Development and Operations Committee on 19 September 2013 (RDO/2013/164) and remain in force (were saved) under clause 31(3) of the current WMM 2019 bylaw.

18.    While a bylaw must be reviewed every five or ten years according to the Local Government Act 2002, there is no statutory requirement to review a bylaw’s control within a specified period. The current controls have not been reviewed since being made in 2012.

19.    The process to decide the controls requires the council to comply with the decision-making requirements under Subpart 1 of Part 6 of the Local Government Act 2002. This includes the consideration of options and community views in proportion to the significance of the decision and alignment with any council policy or plan.

20.    The Regulatory and Safety Committee currently has delegated authority from the Governing Body to decide controls (GB/2022/112).

Staff review of the bylaw controls for kerbside collections

21.    In early 2023 Waste Solutions staff commenced a review of the two current controls for kerbside collections to identify and assess key operational improvements.

22.    The review methodology included engagement with staff in relevant council departments and an evaluation of changes to central government waste policy.

23.    The review was triggered by the need to align with government changes to standardise kerbside recycling services nationally, that were publicly consulted on during 2021 and 2022. Other reasons for the review included the need to align the controls (adopted in 2012) with the WMM 2019 bylaw. See Table 2 for further information.

 


 

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The review found that the current controls are out-of-date and require improvement

24.    Table 2 summarises the feedback gathered from staff on the two current controls, which found the controls are out-of-date and require improvement.

Table 2. Summary of findings from review of bylaw controls

Issue/Opportunity

Summary of feedback

Content and structure issues

·     The controls are overly prescriptive and complicated, especially by specifying different set-out times for collections in commercial, urban and rural areas which are not identified and no longer relevant.

·     There should be a consistent approach in requiring people to put the correct materials in each bin rather than specifying a percentage of inappropriate material that must not be exceeded. 

·     The maximum weights in the controls need to allow more flexibility according to bin/bag specifications, and food scraps and waste collection methodologies by council and commercial service providers.

·     A maximum bin size should be specified noting that Auckland Transport’s Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw 2022 does not allow for bins or other waste containers to be placed in the road corridor (such as skip bins) unless in accordance with the WMM bylaw 2019. A maximum size under the WMM bylaw 2019 ensures that oversize bins are not set out on a public place.

·     Minor alterations are needed to allow for missed bin/bag collections, to provide for consolidated collection points on public land (e.g. in rural areas), and to prevent placement of bins/bags obscuring  sightlines for road users, or preventing access to bus stops and other shared paths or cycleways. 

Misalignment issues

·     Waste collector responsibilities that are currently specified in the existing controls should be transferred to the licences issued as part of the WMM 2019 bylaw’s waste collector approval process. This is because the WMM 2019 bylaw does not provide for controls to apply over waste collector responsibilities. This means that the current controls that apply to waste collectors need to be retained until the transition process is completed. This includes rules related to kerbside collection times, provision of bins/bags that are fit for purpose and provision of information to customers.

 

 

 

 

·     The controls need to be aligned to the central government Gazette Notice (Standard Materials for Kerbside Collections Notice 2023) issued on 13 September 2023. The gazette notice is part of the Ministry for the Environment’s work to standardise collection services across the country. From 1 February 2024, all councils’ kerbside collection services must accept the standard materials as specified by government.

·     Alignment is needed with the Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan 2020-2030 in terms of pest plant materials that may be placed in a council refuse container.

Opportunities to strengthen outcomes (environmental, health and safety, operational aspects)

·     The controls can be strengthened by identifying the types of wastes that should not be collected (prohibited waste) to reduce health and safety risks to the public and collection workers, as well as prevent damage to property and equipment.

·     The controls could be strengthened to ensure a consistent approach requiring people to use their approved containers correctly.

25.    The review also identified that the next review of the WMM 2019 bylaw (scheduled to commence in 2024), should consider enabling controls to be made for the storage and deposit of waste for collection from private property. Currently the WMM 2019 bylaw only enables controls for kerbside collections and relies on waste collection licence conditions to regulate private property collections (for example from multi-unit developments). Suggestions include:

·    clarifying the requirement to put materials in the correct bin or bag

·    clarifying requirement to not exceed maximum weight limits for bins or bags

·    controls to prevent wind-blown litter and pollution from unsecured waste.

The most appropriate regulatory option is to make a new control

26.    The objectives associated with the review relate to ensuring any control is effective, efficient and valid in relation to the WMM 2019 bylaw’s purpose.

27.    This approach is appropriate because the WMM 2019 bylaw already determines that a control is the most appropriate way to achieve its purpose. The WMM 2019 bylaw’s purpose in relation to the storage and deposit of waste for kerbside collection is to manage and minimise waste, protect the public from health and safety risks and nuisance, and to manage the use of council-controlled public places.

28.    Staff identified two options as the most appropriate regulatory response to the review findings. Staff then completed a comparative assessment of the options in the table below.  Each option includes a description, pros and cons and assessment against criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, and validity (i.e. not being inconsistent with legislation including the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 and WMM 2019 bylaw). The assessment uses a classification system of ticks “” and crosses “û” to illustrate the relative achievement of an option against each criterion.


 

 

Table 3. Assessment of each option against criteria

Option

Description, Pros and Cons

Effectiveness

Efficiency

Validity

Option 1 status quo

Retain the current two kerbside collection controls.

Pros:

·    No change to rules familiar to the public.

·    Retains controls that apply to waste collectors until included in new or renewed licences.

Cons:

·    Does not align with government’s regulation for standardised materials in recycling and food scraps collections, which also creates a reputational risk.

·    Misses the opportunity to improve prescriptive and confusing elements of the controls.

·    Misses the opportunity to clarify and introduce rules to help reduce health and safety risks to the public and collection workers, as well as prevent damage to property/equipment.

·    Misses the opportunity to align with operational practices to collect bins/bags accidentally not collected during a scheduled service, and to provide for council-approved consolidation locations.

🗶

🗶

Option 2 new control

Combine the two controls into a new control which addresses the key findings from the review and retain current controls that apply to waste collectors.

Pros:

·    Aligns with government’s standard for materials in recycling and food scraps collections.

·    Reduces reputational risk and public confusion from having a control that is misaligned with government regulation.

·    Strengthens the regulatory approach for prohibited items and contamination in recycling bins.

·    Is less prescriptive and simpler to understand.

·    Aligns with operational practices to collect bins/bags that were accidentally not collected during a scheduled service, and to provide for council-approved consolidation locations.

·    Ensures the current controls that apply to waste collectors are retained until the transition process to include those rules in new and renewed waste collector licences is completed. 

Cons:

·    Reputation risk that a new control has been made without public consultation (mitigation noted in para 48 below).

29.    Based on the above analysis, staff recommend Option 2 new control because it addresses most of the current problems and opportunities identified by the review to help achieve the WMM 2019 bylaw objectives.

Staff have developed a new kerbside collection control

30.    Staff have developed a new control (Attachment A) in response to the review findings and options assessment.

31.    The new control introduces changes and improvements that are largely operational, having negligible impacts for the public and waste collectors, or are to align with government’s new recycling standards that we publicly consulted on in 2022. Key operational improvements are listed below. 

·    The two current controls are simplified by combining them into a single control which makes the rules easier to understand and less prescriptive.

·    The removal of rules relating to waste collector responsibilities that the WMM 2019 bylaw regulates as part of council’s waste collector approval (licensing) process.

·    Clarification of the types of waste which are prohibited from being collected from public land to reduce the risk of injury to people or waste collection workers, and prevent damage to collection equipment (e.g. gas bottles explosions, or truck fires linked to lithium batteries).

·    Specification of materials accepted in council kerbside recycling and food scraps collections to align with new government standards that start on 1 February 2024.

·    Clarification of the rules regarding where and at what time waste can be placed on a public place for collection to manage efficient waste collection services while protecting pedestrian and vehicular safety and access. This includes provisions to allow for missed collections and to specify consolidated collection points, and to protect sightlines, and access to bus stops or shared paths. These measures are already in place, but the rules clarify these measures.


 

 

·    Clarification of rules regarding the weight of material that can be placed in bin/bags to be within container specifications and to not endanger waste collectors or equipment.

·    Help promote consistent recycle-right messaging and enable enforcement actions to happen where necessary.

32.    In developing the new control, consideration was given to community views obtained from previous public consultations about kerbside collections for the waste plan 2018, WMM 2019 bylaw and 2021 and 2022 council submissions on proposed changes to national waste policy and operational interactions with the public and waste collectors.

Staff recommend the committee accept the review findings and adopt a new control

33.    Staff recommend that the committee:

·    agree to the review findings, endorse Option 2 – new control as the most appropriate response, and adopt a new Auckland Council Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw (Storage and Deposit of Waste) Control 2023 as contained in Attachment A that commences on 1 February 2024

·    revoke the current Separation of Domestic Waste Control on 1 February 2024

·    revoke only those rules in the current Containers for Kerbside Collection Control that apply to people using kerbside collection services on 1 February 2024, and retain those rules that apply to waste collectors.

34.    Taking this approach will help to better manage and minimise waste, protect the public from health and safety risks and nuisance, manage the use of council-controlled public places, and align with the WMM 2019 bylaw and new government standards for council kerbside collections, while allowing for the transition of rules that apply to waste collectors to waste collection licences.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35.    The new control continues to contribute to council's response to climate change and the actions set out in council’s Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan. This is because the new control continues to support initiatives to divert recycling and food scraps from landfill and sets rules that support people to ‘recycle right’ which in turn can improve the quality of the material collected.

36.    Kerbside collections that divert material from landfill are important methods to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with landfill disposal and through recovering recyclable material for reprocessing. The improvements in the new control are more operational in nature however, meaning there is no significant change to current impacts. 

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

37.    The new control does not present significant impacts on the council group.

38.    Waste Solutions staff obtained feedback from staff across multiple council group departments, including Public Law, Environmental Services, Community and Social Policy, Regulatory, and Auckland Transport during the review and to input on the development of a new control. This feedback informed the summary in Table 2.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

39.    The new control aligns with both the waste plan 2018 and the WMM 2019 bylaw which reflect public feedback received at that time.  

40.    In 2021 and 2022 Council provided submissions to the Ministry for the Environment on proposed changes to national waste policy, relating to the review of New Zealand Waste Strategy and the government’s plans to standardise kerbside recycling collections. The submissions included views from all local boards.

41.    While adopting a new control under the bylaw has no impact on local governance, there are local aspects that have a positive impact on communities which may be of interest to local boards, for example, reducing the likelihood of truck fires. In the development of the new control, staff considered local board projects and previously expressed views, however, did not seek specific feedback given the new control focuses on improvements which are largely operational (refer paragraph 32).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

42.    As part of the review of the controls, Waste Solutions staff considered iwi and Māori views on waste minimisation and management as previously expressed through Māori priorities articulated in council’s waste plan 2018, past engagement on the WMM 2019 bylaw, and recent engagement with mana whenua to develop council’s submissions on waste policy changes to the Ministry for the Environment in 2021 and current review of the waste plan 2018.

43.    Given the changes with a new control are largely operational to protect the health and safety of collection staff and the public, and to improve waste minimisation, they should have a positive impact on the community and Māori. The new control will also align with the WMM bylaw 2019, the Regional Pest Management Plan 2020, and the required nation-wide recycling standards that were publicly consulted by the Ministry for the Environment.  Staff did not seek specific feedback from iwi or Māori due to the operational nature of the changes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

44.    Adopting and implementing the new control will be cost neutral and will therefore not present financial implications for the council group.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

45.    The following table identifies the main risk with adopting a new control and associated mitigation measures.

Risk

Impact

Mitigation

Stakeholders or the public are opposed or concerned about changes to the WMM 2019 bylaw controls

Minor reputational risk to council about its review process and consultation.

The new control is largely operational, having negligible impacts for the public and waste collectors or align with new nationwide recycling standards that were publicly consulted on in 2022. The new control also addresses health and safety risks consistent with the government’s Standardisation of kerbside collections: Health and Safety review.

In developing the new control, consideration was given to community views obtained from previous public consultations about kerbside collections for the waste plan 2018, WMM 2019 bylaw and 2021 and 2022 council submissions on proposed changes to national waste policy and operational interactions with the public and waste collectors.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

46.    Staff will update the council’s website with the new control and inform waste collectors through a special newsletter about the transition of rules to waste collector licences.

47.    A communications campaign is being planned separately to advise the public of the changes to kerbside recycling and food scraps based on government’s standardisation. That campaign will be funded through existing budgets.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw (Collections) Control 2023

 

      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Hana Perry - Relationship Advisor

Sarah Le Claire- Waste Planning Manager

Parul Sood - General Manager Waste Solutions

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services

 

 


Regulatory and Community Safety Committee

05 December 2023

 

Summary of Regulatory and Community Safety Committee information memoranda, workshops, and briefings (including the Forward Work Programme) - 5 December 2023

File No.: CP2023/18207

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.      To receive a summary and provide a public record of memoranda or briefing papers that have been distributed to the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee.

2.      To note the progress on the Forward Work Programme appended as Attachment A

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.      This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility of information circulated to Regulatory and Community Safety Committee members via memoranda/briefings, where no decisions are required.

4.      No information items have been distributed.

5.      Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this summary. Committee members should direct any questions to the relevant staff.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee:

a)      whiwhi / receive the Summary of Regulatory and Community Safety Committee information memoranda and briefings – 5 December 2023

b)      tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the progress on the Forward Work Programme appended as Attachment A of the agenda report.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Forward Work Programme

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sam Riddiford - Governance Advisor

Authoriser

Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services

 

 


Regulatory and Community Safety Committee

05 December 2023

 

Determination of Objection against Disqualification of Dog Owner Jarrod Sykes

File No.: CP2023/15344

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.      To hear and determine the objection by Mr Jarrod Sykes against his disqualification to own dogs pursuant to Section 25 of the Dog Control Act 1996 (DCA).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.      Mr Sykes was the owner of a 3-year old male Staffordshire Bull Terrier cross Huntaway named Dax. The dog was unregistered and not microchipped. On 12 May 2021 Mr Sykes was convicted on a charge under section 58 of the DCA for an attack by Dax on a child that caused serious injuries. The court sentenced Mr Sykes to 95 hours community work, $2 500 reparation to the victim and ordered the destruction of Dax. The destruction order was executed on 29 June 2021.

3.      Section 25(1)(c) of the DCA provides that a territorial authority must disqualify a person from being an owner of a dog if that person is convicted of an offence (not being an infringement offence) against the DCA.

4.      On 4 May 2023 Animal Management decided to disqualify Mr Sykes from owning dogs. The period of disqualification is for 5 years commencing on 3 February 2020 being the date of the offence and ending on 3 February 2025. (Refer Attachment A).

5.      The effect of the disqualification is that Mr Sykes may not own or be in possession of a dog at any time during the period of disqualification.

6.      Mr Sykes objects to his disqualification on the following grounds (Refer Attachment B):

·    There was an undue delay in the disqualification process.

·    His relationship with his partner is being impacted because she owns a dog.

·    He now acknowledges and appreciates his obligations under the DCA.

7.      The purpose of disqualifying a person from owning dogs is to –

·    Prevent re-offending that may cause a nuisance or harm to persons or animals by prohibiting the person from owning dogs,

·    Serve as a general deterrence to other dog owners, and

·    Bring home to a dog owner the consequences of their failure to comply with their obligations and responsibilities under the DCA which may cause a nuisance or harm to persons or animals.

8.      Section 26 of the DCA provides the right to a disqualified person to be heard in support of their objection to the disqualification. The Regulatory and Safety Committee (the Committee) must hear the objection and decide whether to –

a)   Uphold,

b)   Bring forward the date of termination, or

c)   Immediately terminate the disqualification.

9.      Mr Sykes has the right of appeal to the District Court if he is dissatisfied with the decision of the Committee.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee:

a)      whakaae / agree to hear and determine the objection, and

b)      whakaae / agree to uphold the disqualification of Mr Jarrod Sykes for the period of 5 years from 3 February 2020 to 3 February 2025.

Restatement

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

 

Horopaki

Context

10.    The Governing Body of the Auckland Council has delegated to the Committee the responsibility for regulatory hearings in Resolution No. GB/2019/109 which was adopted on 12 November 2019.   The regulatory hearings which the Committee is responsible include, amongst others, decisions under the DCA in relation to the consideration of objections under the DCA.

11.    Section 26(3) of the DCA determines that in considering an objection to the disqualification of a person, the Committee should have regard to the following:

a)   The circumstances and nature of the offences in respect of which the objector was disqualified,

b)   The competency of the objector in terms of responsible dog ownership,

c)   Any steps taken by the objector to prevent further offences,

d)   The matters advanced in support of the objection, and

e)   Any other relevant matters.

The circumstances and nature of the offence in respect of which Mr Sykes was disqualified

12.    On 3 February 2020 at approximately 12.30pm the victim, a two-year old boy, was with his father visiting Mr Sykes.  The victim’s father placed the victim on the lounge floor next to Dax.  The victim was playing with a wooden toy which connected Dax on its nose. Dax then bit the victim on his face and rag-dolled him in an arch of about 2 metres. Mr Sykes and victim’s father restrained Dax and pulled him off the victim. The victim was taken to Waitakere Hospital but was transferred to Middlemore Hospital for emergency surgery. He sustained significant injuries to his face requiring multiple surgeries.  (Refer Attachment C for the victim’s clinical record)

Mr Sykes’s competency in terms of responsible dog ownership

13.    Mr Sykes informed the investigating animal management officer that prior to the attack he had seen that Dax was showing anxiety about the presence of the victim and his father. A responsible dog owner would under such circumstances have secured the dog away from the young child.

14.    Dax was unregistered, not microchipped, and not neutered.

Steps taken by Mr Sykes to prevent further offences

15.    On 21 February 2022 Mr Sykes became the registered owner of an American Staffordshire Terrier, called Buddy. Buddy is classified as menacing by breed under section 33C of the DCA. It is not known whether Mr Sykes and Buddy attended any dog training and dog obedience classes.

16.    On 30 May 2023 and after the service of the disqualification notice, Mr Sykes transferred ownership of Buddy to his partner.

Matters advanced by Mr Sykes in support of his objection

17.    It is not a judicial but administrative decision to disqualify a person from owning a dog. The delay in the issuing and serving the notice on Mr Sykes is because his current address was unknown.

18.    According to Animal Management records, Mr Sykes and his partner do not live at the same address. We cannot comment whether Mr Sykes’s relationship with his partner came to an end because of him not being allowed to own or possess a dog.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19.    Public safety is at the heart of the DCA. For this reason, the purpose of disqualifying a person from owning a dog or placing a dog owner on probation is to protect public safety by reducing the likelihood of re-offending that may cause a nuisance or harm to persons or animals. 

20.    In the case of a probationary owner, the likelihood of re-offending is reduced by educating the dog owner in their obligations under the DCA and by limiting the number of dogs that they may own; and requiring the owner to undertake a dog owner education programme and/or a dog obedience course.  

21.    In the case of a disqualified owner, the purpose is to prevent re-offending by prohibiting the person from owning dogs, and to bring home to a dog owner the consequences to their failure to comply with their obligations.

22.    Section 25 of the DCA determines that the Council must disqualify a repeat offender from owning a dog unless it is satisfied that the circumstances of the offences are such that –

a)   Disqualification is not warranted, or

b)   The person should rather be classified as a probationary owner under section 21 of the DCA.

23.    The effect of section 25 of the DCA is that the classification as a probationary owner can only occur if the territorial authority is first satisfied that a disqualification is not warranted because of the circumstances of the offences and the offender.

24.    It was decided to disqualify Mr Sykes and not place him on probation for the following reasons:

a)   The offence is too serious to warrant a probationary classification.

b)   The importance of general deterrence.

c)   By the time that Mr Sykes’s address became known, it would have been ineffectual to issue him with a probationary classification.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25.    This is a report about dog ownership which has no climate impact.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26.    This is a report about dog ownership which does not require council group views.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

27.    This is a report about dog ownership which has no local impact. Local Board views have not been sought.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.    This is a report about dog ownership which has no impact on Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29.    The decision by the Committee on the disqualification of a dog owner has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30.    Mr Sykes has the right of appeal to the District Court if he is dissatisfied with the decision of the Committee. The risk of the Committee’s determination being overturned on appeal is low.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31.    The Committee must give Mr Sykes written notice of its decision and the reasons for it as soon as practical.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Notice of disqualification

 

b

Objection to disqualification

 

c

Clinical notes of victim

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Chrisna Nortje - Principal Specialist Animal Management

Authorisers

Eleanor Waitoa, Manager Animal Management

James Hassall - General Manager, Licensing and Regulatory Compliance

Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services