Agenda of Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting

	Authorising Body	Mayor/Council
	Status	Standing Committee
COUNCIL COMMITTEE	Title	Regulatory Compliance Committee Terms of Reference
	Approval Date	19 December 2019
	Responsible Officer	Chief Executive

Purpose

The purpose of the Regulatory Compliance Committee (the Committee) is to implement and monitor regulatory compliance and statutory matters on behalf of the Governing Body. The Committee will conduct hearings (except those under the Resource Management Act 1991) and undertake any functions as requested or delegated by Council from time to time provided the functions conform to the Local Government Act 2002.

The Committee will have functional responsibility for the following aspects:

· Hearings (excluding RMA and DLC)

· Regulatory activities

· Regulatory policies and bylaws

· Regulatory compliance

· Mana Whakahono

To perform his or her role effectively, each Committee member must develop and maintain his or her skills and knowledge, including an understanding of the Committee’s responsibilities and key legislation.

Delegations

The Regulatory Compliance Committee shall have the following delegated powers and be accountable to Council for the exercising of these powers. In exercising the delegated powers, the Regulatory Compliance Committee will operate within:

· policies, plans, standards or guidelines that have been established and approved by Council.

· the overall priorities of Council.

· the needs of the local communities; and

· the approved budgets for the activity.

Power to Delegate

The Regulatory Compliance Committee may not delegate any of its responsibilities, duties or powers.

Membership

The Council will determine the membership of the Regulatory Compliance Committee.

The Regulatory Compliance Committee will comprise of at least six elected members (one of which will be the chairperson).

When the Regulatory Compliance Committee is meeting as a Hearing Committee, the Chairperson and a majority of the Committee members must be accredited commissioners under the relevant Act.

When the Regulatory Compliance Committee is meeting as a Hearing Committee, the Chairperson shall hold the ‘chair certification' as per the Act.

The Committee membership for each hearing shall be appointed by the Chairperson of the

Regulatory Compliance Committee together with the Chief Executive and will normally comprise the core Regulatory Compliance Committee members.

The Regulatory Compliance Committee will comprise of at least six elected members (one of which will be the chairperson).

Mayor Carter

Kelly Stratford – Chairperson

Dave Collard – Deputy Chairperson

John Vujcich

Rachel Smith

David Clendon

Ann Court

Belinda Ward – Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board Chair

Non-appointed Councillors may attend Regulatory Compliance Committee (but not Hearings) with speaking rights, but not voting rights.

Quorum - Committee

The quorum at a meeting of the Regulatory Compliance Committee is 4 members.

Frequency of Meetings

The Regulatory Compliance Committee shall meet every 6 weeks but may be cancelled if there is no business.

Committees Responsibilities

The Committees responsibilities are described below:

Hearings, Objections and Appeals

· Conduct hearings, as delegated by Council, in accordance with the relevant legislative and policy requirements (excluding Resource Management Act and District Licensing)

· Approve and monitor Council’s list of hearing Commissioners for Resource Management Act and District Licensing hearings.

Regulatory Activities

· Assess and provide advice to Council on level of service and policy issues relating to:

o regulatory matters; and

o provision of services

· Reviewing and making recommendations to the Chief Executive in respect to functions and activities within the purpose of the Committee regarding codes of practice.

Policies and Bylaws

· Recommend the development and review of Council’s regulatory policies and district bylaws

· Make a recommendation where in a bylaw the Council has specified that a matter be regulated, controlled or prohibited by the Council by resolution (eg dog areas under the dog control bylaw, speed limits)

Compliance

· Ensure that Council’s planning and regulatory functions comply with legislative requirements and Council policy and processes

· Monitor operational functions comply with legislative requirements and Council policy

o BCA (building consents)

o RMA (resource consents)

· Ensure that consents associated with Council's infrastructure are being met and renewals are planned for

· Receive traffic light reports on regulatory compliance (policy, plans, functions and bylaws) such as:

o District Plan (when proposed)

o Building Act

o Resource Management Act

o Licences (various acts)

o Animal management

Mana Whakahono-ā-Rohe (Mana Whakahono)

· Monitor regulatory matters arising from Mana Whakahono under the Resource Management Act 1991.

The committee seeks to foster and encourage participation and engagement with constituents.

HEARINGS, OBJECTIONS AND APPEALS

Regulatory Compliance Committee, meeting as a Hearing Committee

The Regulatory Committee, when meeting as a Hearing Committee, shall be delegated authority to hear and determine matters as follows:

Public Works Act 1981

Public work requirements.

Local Government Act 2002

Objections against the construction of public works on private land.

Local Government Act 1974

Objections and appeals to road stopping proposals.

Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987

Applications for exemption, waiver or compliance.

Delegated decisions

· Requests for review or objections to delegated decisions by the Committee and/or delegated officers.

· Appeals against decisions made by officials acting under delegated authority in accordance with approved Council Policy.

Dog Control Act 1996

Objections.

Gambling Act 2003, Health Act 1956 and Building Act 2004

Hearings, objections and related matters.

And any other such matters as required under the legislation (but not Resource Management Act or the Supply and Sale of Alcohol Act for matters outside the district licensing committee).

Rules and Procedures

Council’s Standing Orders and Code of Conduct apply to all the committee’s meetings.

Annual reporting

The Chair of the Committee will submit a written report to the Chief Executive on an annual basis. The review will summarise the activities of the Committee and how it has contributed to the Council’s governance and strategic objectives. The Chief Executive will place the report on the next available agenda of the governing body.

REGULATORY COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE - MEMBERS REGISTER OF INTERESTS

Name	Responsibility (i.e. Chairperson etc)	Declaration of Interests	Nature of Potential Interest	Member's Proposed Management Plan
Hon John Carter QSO	Board Member of the Local Government Protection Programme	Board Member of the Local Government Protection Program
Hon John Carter QSO	Carter Family Trust
Kelly Stratford (Chair)	KS Bookkeeping and Administration	Business Owner, provides bookkeeping, administration and development of environmental management plans	None perceived	Step aside from decisions that arise, that may have conflicts
	Waikare Marae Trustees	Trustee	Maybe perceived conflicts	Case by case basis
	Bay of Islands College	Parent Elected Trustee	None perceived	If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Karetu School	Parent Elected Trustee	None perceived	If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Māori title land – Moerewa and Waikare	Beneficiary and husband is a shareholder	None perceived	If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Sister is employed by Far North District Council			Will not discuss work/governance mattes that are confidential
	Gifts - food and beverages	Residents and ratepayers may ‘shout’ food and beverage	Perceived bias or predetermination	Case by case basis
	Taumarere Counselling Services	Advisory Board Member	May be perceived conflicts	Should conflict arise, step aside from voting
	Sport Northland	Board Member	May be perceived conflicts	Should conflict arise, step aside from voting
	He Puna Aroha Putea Whakapapa	Trustee	May be perceived conflicts	Should conflict arise, step aside from voting should they apply for funds
	Kawakawa Returned Services Association	Member	May be perceived conflicts	Should conflict arise, step aside from voting should they apply for funds
	Whangaroa Returned Services Association	Member	May be perceived conflicts	Should conflict arise, step aside from voting should they apply for funds
	National Emergency Management Advisor Committee	Member		Case by case basis
	Te Rūnanga ā Iwi o Ngāpuhi	Tribal affiliate member	As a descendent of Te Rūnanga ā Iwi o Ngāpuhi I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Te Rūnanga ā Iwi o Ngāpuhi Council relations	Declare a perceived conflict should there appear to be one
	Te Rūnanga ā Iwi o Ngāti Hine	Tribal affiliate member	Could have a perceived conflict of interest	Declare a perceived conflict should I determine there is a conflict
	Kawakawa Business and Community Association	Member		Will declare a perceived conflict should there appear to be one
Kelly Stratford - Partner	Chef and Barista	Opua Store	None perceived
Kelly Stratford - Partner	Māori title land – Moerewa	Shareholder	None perceived	If there was a conflict of interest, I would step aside from decision making
David Collard (Deputy Chair)	Snapper Bonanza 2011 Limited	45% Shareholder and Director
David Collard (Deputy Chair)	Trustee of Te Ahu Charitable Trust	Council delegate to this board
David Clendon	Chairperson – He Waka Eke Noa Charitable Trust	None		Declare if any issue arises
	Member of Vision Kerikeri	None		Declare if any issue arises
	Joint owner of family home in Kerikeri	Hall Road, Kerikeri
David Clendon – Partner	Resident Shareholder on Kerikeri Irrigation
Deputy Mayor Ann Court	Waipapa Business Association	Member		Case by case
	Warren Pattinson Limited	Shareholder	Building company. FNDC is a regulator and enforcer	Case by case
	Kerikeri Irrigation	Supplies my water		No
	District Licensing	N/A	N/A	N/A
	Ann Court Trust	Private	Private	N/A
	Waipapa Rotary	Honorary member	Potential community funding submitter	Declare interest and abstain from voting.
	Properties on Onekura Road, Waipapa	Owner Shareholder	Any proposed FNDC Capital works or policy change which may have a direct impact (positive/adverse)	Declare interest and abstain from voting.
	Property on Daroux Dr, Waipapa	Financial interest	Any proposed FNDC Capital works or policy change which may have a direct impact (positive/adverse)	Declare interest and abstain from voting.
	Flowers and gifts	Ratepayer 'Thankyou'	Bias/ Pre-determination?	Declare to Governance
	Coffee and food	Ratepayers sometimes 'shout' food and beverage	Bias or pre-determination	Case by case
	Staff	N/A	Suggestion of not being impartial or pre-determined!	Be professional, due diligence, weigh the evidence. Be thorough, thoughtful, considered impartial and balanced. Be fair.
	Warren Pattinson	My husband is a builder and may do work for Council staff		Case by case
Ann Court - Partner	Warren Pattinson Limited	Director	Building Company. FNDC is a regulator	Remain at arm’s length
	Air NZ	Shareholder	None	None
	Warren Pattinson Limited	Builder	FNDC is the consent authority, regulator and enforcer.	Apply arm’s length rules
	Property on Onekura Road, Waipapa	Owner	Any proposed FNDC capital work in the vicinity or rural plan change. Maybe a link to policy development.	Would not submit. Rest on a case by case basis.
Rachel Smith	Friends of Rolands Wood Charitable Trust	Trustee
	Mid North Family Support	Trustee
	Property Owner	Kerikeri
	Friends who work at Far North District Council
	Kerikeri Cruising Club	Subscription Member
	Vision Kerikeri	Financial Member
Rachel Smith (Partner)	Property Owner	Kerikeri
	Friends who work at Far North District Council
	Kerikeri Cruising Club	Subscription Member and Treasurer
	Vision Kerikeri	Financial Member
	Town and General Groundcare Limited	Director, Shareholder
John Vujcich	Board Member	Pioneer Village	Matters relating to funding and assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Waitukupata Forest Ltd	Potential for council activity to directly affect its assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Rural Service Solutions Ltd	Matters where council regulatory function impact of company services	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Kaikohe (Rau Marama) Community Trust	Potential funder	Declare interest and abstain
	Partner	MJ & EMJ Vujcich	Matters where council regulatory function impacts on partnership owned assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Member	Kaikohe Rotary Club	Potential funder, or impact on Rotary projects	Declare interest and abstain
	Member	New Zealand Institute of Directors	Potential provider of training to Council	Declare a Conflict of Interest
	Member	Institute of IT Professionals	Unlikely, but possible provider of services to Council	Declare a Conflict of Interest
Belinda Ward	Ward Jarvis Family Trust	Trustee
	Kenneth Jarvis Family Trust	Trustee
	Residence in Watea
Belinda Ward (Partner)	Ward Jarvis Family Trust	Trustee and beneficiary
	Kenneth Jarvis Family Trust	Trustee and beneficiary
	Residence in Watea	Trustee

Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

26 April 2022

5 Information Reports

5.1 Noise Control and Parking Enforcement Update

File Number: A3653116

Author: Rochelle Deane, Manager - Environmental Services

Authoriser: Dean Myburgh, General Manager - District Services

TAKE PŪRONGO / Purpose of the Report

To report to the committee on:

· The number of noise related RFSs received and response times

· The number of noise abatements issued

· The number of parking infringements issued, the type, and locations

· The effectiveness of the noise control contract (and renewal of contract timeframes)

· The effectiveness of the parking enforcement and further options

WHAKARĀPOPOTO MATUA / Executive SummarY

This report is an update on noise and parking enforcement activities in the district, between 1 September 2021 and 31 March 2022, this being the period since the last Committee report received 12 October 2021.

Noise

To ensure compliance with the Resource Management Act for noise pollution, First Security is contracted to FNDC to respond to noise complaints across the district.

The performance measure in place for noise complaints is to respond within the following timeframes:

· Urban areas: 1 hour

· Rural areas: 2 hours

The current KPI performance measure for Council’s level of service is to respond to complaints ≥95% within the set time. There has been a total of 702 noise RFS received between 1 September 2021 to 31 March 2022. This is 111 less complaints than for the same period last year. This is largely due to Covid Alert Level gathering restrictions.

91% of these complaints were categorised as urban complaints, however within the contract there is no mapped definition of rural and urban. These locations have been defined by the administration team where urban is seen to be the main residential and industrial areas (Kerikeri, Kaikohe, Kawakawa, Moerewa, Kaitaia, Russel, and Paihia). There has been a gradual improvement in rural response times, with a percentage average of 87% achieved from September 2021 to end of March 2022. Urban response times remain lower for this same period with an average of 77%.

Police resourcing has, at times, influenced meeting levels of service, as Police are required to be present when completing a seizure and to assist entry on to several ‘red flagged’ properties in the district (i.e., properties where threats and aggressive behaviour by occupants has been experienced on previous visits and registered in the Council system). There have been 166 verbal warnings, 91 Excessive Noise Directives (END’s) issued, and 4 seizures performed since September 2021.

The Security Services Contract with First Security remains on an extension for Council to undertake a service delivery review. This contract currently includes building security, alarm monitoring and cash collection.

It is preferred that the Noise Control part of the contract is separated from the building security, and security services aspects of the contract, and is currently being explored. A S17A review should provide recommendations on how the delivery of the service can be structured. This would include providing clearer definitive areas for response times and include a coastal zone, where travel times are extended. At present these are not clearly defined, and some are not achievable from where bases are located.

Council is looking to engage professional services to undertake a review and S17A for all security service delivery within the next year.

First Security are committed to make improvements to meet KPI targets and provide a better service.

Parking Enforcement

Parking Wardens are warranted under the Land Transport Act 1998 to enforce the provisions of any stationary vehicle offence or special vehicle lane offence. The Council’s sole Parking Warden monitors all parking across the district focusing on central business districts on Council-controlled roads.

There were 252 parking infringements issued between 1 September 2021 and 31 March 2022, 201 less than for the same period last year (453). Most infringements issued within the district are for the breaching of parking time limits. People parking in areas reserved for disabled persons without a permit also requires ongoing monitoring and enforcement across the district.

TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report Noise Control and Parking Enforcement Update.

tĀHUHU KŌRERO / Background

Noise

The Council can step in when noise being generated is excessive and causing a disturbance to others. Excessive noise is any noise that is under human control and of such a nature as to unreasonably interfere with the peace, comfort, and convenience of any person. Examples of excessive noise are noise from a loud party (people noise), stereos, band practices, burglar alarms or machinery.

There is no one set level for noise that is acceptable. The level of noise that is acceptable varies according to location of neighbours, time of day, zone you live/work in, presence of sound barriers and the type of noise. The same noise levels during the day may not be acceptable at night. Under the Resource Management Act (1991), FNDC has the power to control excessive or unreasonable noise. FNDC currently contracts this service to First Security.

If a Noise Control Officer is called out to investigate noise they will determine if the noise is reasonable and within permissible levels.

· It is not necessary to use monitoring equipment to determine if the noise is excessive.

· The noise may have ceased or subsided or be deemed not excessive by the Officer.

· If the noise is deemed to be excessive, a Noise Control Officer may give a verbal warning or serve a written direction to reduce the noise. This is in force for up to 72 hours.

· If the noise continues, recurs, or increases and the written direction has been breached, the Officer and the police can seize the equipment.

· If seizure is not possible a notice of Non-Compliance with Direction to Abate Excessive Noise is issued, and prosecution may result. Fines of up to $10,000 may apply.

Parking

Parking infringements fees are set by legislation and of low monetary value in comparison to other legislation penalties for offences, as a result income from enforcement is minimal– see attachment A, Parking Infringement Fees.

Following the VADE model, the aim, however, is to encourage voluntary compliance and having the presence of a warden and an educational approach encourages this within the community.

Vehicle Warrant of Fitness and Registration Parking Trial

It is illegal to operate a vehicle without a valid and visible WoF and Registration unless driving directly to a place where repairs will be conducted. Council Parking Wardens are authorised to enforce these provisions on stationary vehicles.

Government makes the regulations that prescribe the fees for these offences. Council does not have the ability to change the amount. The fine amount is $200 for not displaying or having an outdated WoF/Registration. Waka Kotahi have recently released ‘Road to Zero – NZ’s road safety strategy, which sets a target to reduce deaths and serious injuries on New Zealand roads, streets, cycleways and footpaths by 40 percent over the next 10 years.

One key focus area under ‘Road to Zero’ is vehicle safety.

It is important that a vehicle always remains safe to drive and can prevent a crash or protect its occupants to reduce the numbers of deaths and injuries on our roads. A warrant of fitness (WoF) is a regular check to ensure that a vehicle meets required safety standards. Council Parking Wardens can play an important role to ensure that there a fewer unsafe and unregistered vehicle on our roads across the district. Prior to the trial FNDC wardens have not been enforcing this requirement across the district.

At the May 2021 Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting it was approved to trial the enforcement of stationary vehicle Warrant of Fitness (WoF) and Vehicle Registrations across the Far North District for a period of 12 months. This trial commenced 1 July 2021.

State Highway Delegation

Waka Kotahi (the NZ Transport Agency) has sole powers of control for all purposes of all state highways under the Government Roading Powers Act 1989 (GRPA).

Section 62(1) of the GRPA, authorises the Transport Agency to delegate to territorial authorities all or any of the functions, duties, and powers of control conferred on the Transport Agency by the GRPA with respect to any state highway or any portion of a state highway where it makes good sense for the Council to perform that role.

One of the powers the agency can delegate to council is for stationary vehicle offences via an Instrument of delegation

At the May 2021 Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting it was approved to seek delegation from Waka Kotahi for the power to enforce any stationary vehicle parking restrictions on State Highway on behalf of the agency.

State Highway Delegations for stationary vehicle offences were provided to FNDC in January 2022 initially for four specific areas of state highway in the district. See Attachment B – State Highway Delegations.

To regulate and enforce parking and stationary vehicle offences on the state highways, Council must make a bylaw under section 22AB of the Land Transport Act 1998 in accordance with the delegation.

On 07 April 2022, Council approved to amend the soon to be made Parking Bylaw to include the regulation of parking and stationary vehicle offences on State Highways as per the delegation given by Waka Kotahi. Identifying the specific regulation required (e.g., time limits, mobility parks) will require further research and engagement. Community Boards will be invited to be part of this engagement.

The Strategy Development team has also commenced the development of a parking policy. An initial research and options report is expected to be presented to the Strategy and Policy Committee by July 2022. The parking policy will inform local area parking plans. As part of this process elected members, including community boards, will be able to identify any further state highway sections that may benefit from parking restrictions (e.g., Ōpononi). Council will then apply to Waka Kotahi for an extension to our delegations.

Work on the new Parking Bylaw is complete and the final Bylaw will be presented to the Strategy and Policy Committee on 03 May 2022 for recommendation to Council on 19 May 2022. The current Parking and Traffic Control Bylaw will automatically revoke on 17 June 2022.

No substantial changes have been made from the current bylaw to the new bylaw. The parking policy project will provide strategic direction for parking regulation across the district, and it is expected that following the development of local area parking plans, substantial changes to the Parking Bylaw and parking enforcement resources will be required.

MATAPAKI ME NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA / Discussion and Next Steps

Noise

The following graph shows the total numbers of noise complaints received from 2019 to present. Noise Control was not deemed to be an essential service in Covid Alert Level 4 lockdowns, and the graph shows a significant decrease in these periods in the respective years. There is an expected increase over the summer months where there are more social gatherings and holiday periods.

The graph below shows First Security response times as a percentage towards KPI achievement. There has been a gradual improvement in rural response times, with an average percentage of 86.2% from 1 September 2021 to end of March 2021.

Urban response times remain lower on average for this same period with 77%.

Response times are affected by the availability of Police to assist to enter on to properties and the distance required to travel to respond to some complaints.

Rural on time (Less than 2 hours)

Urban on time (Less than 1 hour)

Between 1 September 2021 and 31 March 2022 there have been 91 Excessive Noise Direction (END) notices issued, 166 verbal warnings and four seizures performed.

action Taken September 2021 to March 2022	Count
Abatement notice issued	1
Seizure performed	4
Excessive Noise Directive issued (END’s)	91
Verbal warning	166

Parking Enforcement

There were 252 parking infringements issued between 1 September 2021 and 31 March 2022, 201 less than for the same period last year (453). The Parking Warden did not operate during Alert Levels 4 and 3 and recommenced duties in Alert Level 2 (8 September 2021).

The Parking Warden has noted a significant decrease of vehicles in the Central Business District’s due to Covid with more people working from home or just not coming into town.

The most common offence type is for parking in breach of the time limit. Parking in areas reserved for disabled persons also require ongoing enforcement in the community throughout the year.

Vehicle Warrant of Fitness and Registration Trial

From 1 July 2021 to 16 August 2021 (Alert Level 4 commencement) flyers advertising that FNDC began to monitor vehicles not displaying a current warrant of fitness and/or current license were distributed in the main towns in the Far North. These towns were Kaitaia, Kerikeri, Paihia and Kaikohe.

During normal patrols, the Parking Officer, kept a record of how many vehicles were not displaying a current warrant of fitness and/or license from the total number sighted. Unlicensed vehicles were more common than unwarranted in all areas. Kaitaia and Kaikohe had the highest number of non-compliant vehicles with 15% unlicensed and 5-6% unwarranted.

During the flyer period, the public have given mixed feedback to the trial, with some being outraged believing FNDC were on a revenue gathering exercise in areas of low income, whilst others have thanked FNDC for the reminder that their vehicles license had expired. It was decided to extend the education (flyer) period from one to two months prior to enforcement giving the community further time to become compliant.

Due to the covid lockdowns in 2021 and Waka Kotahi suspending WoF and Rego till the end of November 2021, the Parking Warden could not start issuing infringement notices until December 2021. At this time the focus is on vehicles that have not had a warrant for six months or more. If an infringement is issued all offenders will be given opportunity to obtain a warrant within 56 days. Evidence of a new warrant will be grounds for the infringement to be waived.

Between 1 December 2021 and 31 March 2022 there have been 20 infringement notices issued for having no evidence of a current Warrant of Fitness.

Six notices have been waivered due to the owner complying with updating their WoF, and two infringements have been paid. The balance (12) is still in the system as being either recently issued, or still at reminder stage.

PĀNGA PŪTEA ME NGĀ WĀHANGA TAHUA / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial or resource implications associated with this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Attachment A - Parking Infringment Fees - A3666312 ⇩

2. Attachment B - Instrument of Delegation Stationary Vehicle Offences FNDC - A3666318 ⇩

Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

26 April 2022

5.2 Animal Shelter Update

File Number: A3653745

Author: Rochelle Deane, Manager - Environmental Services

Authoriser: Dean Myburgh, General Manager - District Services

TAKE PŪRONGO / Purpose of the Report

To provide the committee an update on the districts Animal Shelters.

WHAKARĀPOPOTO MATUA / Executive SummarY

Section 67 of the Dog Control Act 1996 requires every Territorial Authority to make such provision as is necessary for the proper custody, care and exercise of dogs impounded, seized, or committed to its custody under this Act and includes establishing, maintaining, and operating a dog pound (animal shelter).

The Far North District Council has planned for the building of two animal shelters in the district to service the entire community.

The northern shelter (Kaitaia) was completed at the end of June 2021 and was officially opened and operational on 23 July 2021.

The temporary shelter (Horeke) was decommissioned on 31 July 2021 and has since been dismantled.

After delays due to Covid-19, site asbestos removal and insufficient funding, the Council is now at the stage of negotiating with the tenderer for the Southern Shelter (Kaikohe), with completion expected in the first quarter of 2023.

TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report Animal Shelter Update.

tĀHUHU KŌRERO / Background

Council was awarded $1 million for animal shelter projects through a successful bid for funding from the Provincial Development Unit (PDU) as part of the shovel-ready projects. This funding increased the budget for the build of two animal shelters for the district to a total of $2.9 million.

The Kaitaia (Northern) shelter build, opened July 2021, cost $1.5 million leaving $1.4 million for the build of the southern animal shelter.

Far North District Council had purchased an existing boarding kennel (Melka), 271 Ngāpuhi Road, Kaikohe, as the site for the permanent animal shelter for the South. Settlement for this property was 31 March 2020.

This facility required extensive upgrading to operate as a Council Animal Shelter before it could meet the Animal Welfare requirements, security and staff health and safety.

The additional funding provided an opportunity to explore further options for the Southern Animal Shelter and the decision was to complete a new build on the site.

The new design provides kennelling for ten dogs, together with the establishment of a facility that supports the rehoming of dogs and the education of dog owners. Two kennels have also been designated for aggressive and/or longer stay dogs.

To provide these additional levels of service, the site needed to be cleared of all current structures, to enable full use of the property and provide for the best placement of kennelling.

MATAPAKI ME NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA / Discussion and Next Steps

Northern (Bonnett Road, Kaitaia)

The northern shelter has been solely used for the impounding of dogs for the entire district since 1 August 2021.

Between 1 August 2021 and 31 March 2022 there have been 198 dogs impounded and 69 dogs euthanised (35%).

Although euthanasia rate is 9% higher compared to the same period in 2020/21. The sole use of the Northern Shelter has not had any impact on the increased euthanasia rates.

Any increase to euthanasia rates would be attributed to the nature of the dogs impounded not meeting the adoption threshold. Council follows best practice procedures which involve not rehoming a dog and places it into the community if there is a risk that it may attack or be aggressive.

A total of 34 dogs were adopted to new homes and 20 dogs were given to rescue groups during the 2020/21 period.

Month	Impounded		Euthanised		Claimed		Rehomed		Rescue
	20/21	21/22	20/21	21/22	20/21	21/22	20/21	21/22	20/21	21/22
August	37	34	10	13	16	12	3	5	5	3
September	50	21	10	11	27	9	3	4	6	1
October	24	24	6	10	14	9	4	1	4	1
November	39	17	10	8	17	2	7	5	2	3
December	24	20	8	7	14	6	5	3	2	2
January	32	21	12	7	9	9	4	3	4	1
February	29	27	3	3	8	5	6	11	5	3
March	37	34	13	10	4	13	4	2	3	6
Total	272	198	72	69	109	65	36	34	31	20

Southern Shelter (Ngāpuhi Road, Kaikohe)

Consents

• Building Consent Granted: 29 October 2021

• Resource Consent Issued: 06 July 2021

• NRC Consent Granted: 07 April 2021

Clearance of Site

• Trees were cleared to enable removal of dwelling week commencing the 6 September 2021

• The dwelling was removed from site on the weekend of 25 September 2021

• Asbestos discovered on site after dwelling removal, asbestos was removed 17 and 18 November 2021

Work still to be completed before construction

• Removal of remaining vegetation, trees, and tree stumps

• Demolition of the large unconsented tin shed

• Pump out and demolition of the septic tank

• Demolition of the small cattery and remaining small, shed buildings

• Demolition of existing animal shelter building, and the removal of left over and broken concrete materials

Tender

• The Request for Tender (RFT) was issued on the Government Electronic Tenders Service (GETS) on 16 November 2021 and closed on GETS on 20 December 2021 at 4pm.

• One tender was received; this was deemed non-compliant for the Methodology Non-Price attribute.

A report went to the Tender Panel on 28 March 2022 with a recommendation that this procurement process is terminated and that negotiations with the sole Tenderer commence with a view to finalising a contract. As this was the second round of tendering, with no response the first time and only one tenderer on the second, the recommendation was approved by the tender panel.

• Negotiations with the Tenderer will commence the week of 4th April 2022.

• Council have applied to MBIE for an extension to complete this project. The extension date is likely to be March 2023. At the time of writing this report this was yet to be approved by MBIE.

• The build is estimated to be 190 days.

PĀNGA PŪTEA ME NGĀ WĀHANGA TAHUA / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial implications in receiving this report. However early indications from discussions with the tenderer suggest that there will be a funding shortfall. This has been flagged at a recent Annual Plan Workshop and will be subject to a Council decision regarding additional funding.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

Nil

Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

26 April 2022

5.3 FNDC Dog Management Bylaw 2018

File Number: A3653772

Author: Rochelle Deane, Manager - Environmental Services

Authoriser: Dean Myburgh, General Manager - District Services

TAKE PŪRONGO / Purpose of the Report

To provide the committee with an update on:

- The prioritisation and timing for any review of the FNDC Dog Management Bylaw 2018

- The effectiveness of the FNDC Animal Management Department in response to Bylaw compliance

WHAKARĀPOPOTO MATUA / Executive SummarY

The Far North District Council, as a territorial authority is required to regulate dogs and enforce the provisions of the Dog Control Act 1996 (the Act) within its district.

TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report FNDC Dog Management Bylaw 2018.

tĀHUHU KŌRERO / Background

The Far North District Council made a new dog control bylaw on 27 March 1997 under the Dog Control Act 1996. This bylaw was reviewed and then an amended bylaw was adopted on 14 September 2006.

The Dog Control Bylaw 2006 was next reviewed on 15 June 2016. This review occurred within the 10-year review period as per section 159 of the Local Government Act 2002. Following the review of the Far North District Council's Dog Control Bylaw just over two years of public consultation and engagement was undertaken.

Based on the community consultation and engagement, the Dog Management Bylaw 2018 was adopted on 13 December 2018. As per section 159 of the Local Government Act 2002 this bylaw is due for review by 13 December 2028.

MATAPAKI ME NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA / Discussion and Next Steps

An early review of a bylaw can be triggered by (1) a change in legislation that renders a bylaw ultra vires or illegal or (2) Upon a request, via a resolution of Council, from elected members for a review of a bylaw.

The Animal Management team are not resourced to proactively patrol or be stationed at all beaches across the district, given its size and the geographic spread.

The ability of Animal Management to conduct patrols is assessed on a daily review basis depending on the number of requests for service received and staff resourcing. The aim is to be as visible as possible, while balancing this with the need to prioritise urgent animal management situations which include dog attacks and roaming dogs.

There have been four Requests for Service (RFS) over the past three years for alleged dog attacks on protected wildlife. The two RFSs received in the current year were both regarding seals on the beach at Ahipara.

Animal Management also responded to email correspondence received on 19 December 2020, for an alleged dog attack on wildlife. The dog owner was infringed under section 53 of the Dog Control Act, (Failure to Control). This was not lodged as an RFS, so is not included in the stats below.

Animal Management Dog Attacks – Requests for Service (RFS)

Attack	2019/2020	2020/2021	2021/2022 to (31 March)
Domestic Animal	64	87	76
Stock	32	37	34
Person	51	78	44
Poultry	25	19	15
Protected Wildlife	0	2	2
Total	172	223	171

Three RFS have been received by Animal Management since 2019/2020 for Taupo Bay.

7 January 2020; Dog aggression Complaint a dog allegedly swam out and bit a surfboard a child was on. The registration tag provided did not match the description of the dog. No dog was identified.

18 December 2020; straying complaint, no details provided of dog or dog owner.

18 January 2021; Report of dog chasing wildlife, no particulars of dogs provided. Patrols undertaken by Animal Management, on 17^th and 18^th January 2021, and no non-compliance noted.

For enforcement action to be taken for uncontrolled dogs on beaches, the alleged dog/dog owner must be clearly identified committing an offence.

The FNDC Dog Management Bylaw 2018 and Dog Management Policy 2018 very clearly provides the dog access rules for the district and dog owner responsibilities. Signage has also been placed on beaches and reserves which provides an effective way for ongoing messages to dog owners regarding their responsibilities in the places they are exercising their dogs.

Education via media release, Council website and Facebook page have also been implemented. Attachment A: Media Release December 2021.

While most dog owners are respectful and compliant with the district’s rules, there are always a few that choose to ignore them. If individual dog owners can be identified as not complying with the access rules Animal Management Officers can follow up and remind the offending dog owners of their obligations to comply with the bylaw and enforce if appropriate.

PĀNGA PŪTEA ME NGĀ WĀHANGA TAHUA / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial or budgetary implications associated with this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Attachment A Media Release - A3666947 ⇩

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	This is a matter of low significance
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	This report complies with the Local Government Act 2002 Schedule 7 Section 28.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	It is the responsibility of each meeting to confirm their minutes therefore the views of another meeting are not relevant.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	There are no implications on Māori in confirming minutes from a previous meeting. Any implications on Māori arising from matters included in meeting minutes should be considered as part of the relevant report.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	This report is asking for the minutes to be confirmed as true and correct record, any interests that affect other people should be considered as part of the individual reports.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There are no financial implications or the need for budgetary provision arising from this report.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has not reviewed this report.