Review of the dog policy and bylaw
Rachael Nicoll made this Official Information request to Dunedin City Council
This request has an unknown status. We're waiting for Rachael Nicoll to read recent responses and update the status.
From: Rachael Nicoll
Dear Dunedin City Council,
These requests arise from the parts of the agenda of the Customer and Regulatory meeting held 21 May 2024 about the review of the dog policy and bylaw intended to commence next month.
This information is required to consider the information in that agenda, allow informed discussions amongst interested parties, and provide informed submissions in the upcoming review. The absence of the information will prevent that occurring and negatively impact the merits of the consultation.
Please provide the information with urgency to prevent repeating the same disadvantage caused by failing to comply with the LGOIMA requirements in relation to requests for the Annual Plan consultation. Noting the LGOIMA allows information to be released in stages, and doing so will comply with the requirement to provide it with urgency, as soon as reasonably practicable.
Please provide the qualifications of those advising Councillors and authoring the documentation, including the qualifications of any consultants or external advisors.
Please provide all operating guidelines relating to dog control and management, whether called employee manuals, internal administration policies, guide-lines or any other name.
Paragraph 11 of the Report in meeting 21 May 2024 states the Policy and Bylaw were last reviewed in 2015/2016. This is a new claim that has not previously made by the DCC. Please provide copies of all materials relating to the review that occurred in 2015.
The proposed Bylaw defines control as “Means the owner or person in charge of a dog is aware of where the dog is and what it is doing, and that the dog is responsive to commands and is not creating a nuisance.” Please provide the legal authority for this definition.
In the meeting 21 May 2024 Cr Whiley referred to “points to consider” he had distributed. In meeting 30 May 2024 the Chair referred to fees and charges being discussed in workshops, and previously agreed. This is consistent with how Council has previously dealt with dog fees and charges.
Therefore please provide
a) the material Cr Whiley distributed
b) The authority for Cr Whiley to involve himself in governance matters concerning dogs despite being disqualified because he made a submission in his personal capacity during the review in 2016.
c) all other materials discussing both the old and proposed Policy/Bylaw in any medium (whether workshops, email exchanges or other mediums) that have not been disclosed in meeting agendas since the Ombudsman began his preliminary investigation in 2022.
d) All records of discussions (whether in workshops, emails or other mediums) about dog control related fees and charges that have not been disclosed in meeting agendas since the Ombudsman began his preliminary investigation in 2022.
Note this information is required to be publicly disclosed. That means it should not have to be requested, and having to do so cannot be used to disadvantage this request.
6. Please provide copies of the actual submissions made during the preliminary engagement in 2023, and the record of the general feedback referred to in the Proposal Statement.
Note this information is necessary because in 2016 undisclosed changes were stated to reflect early engagement and general feedback. When those documents were eventually provided they contained nothing that would prompt those changes and it was subsequently confirmed the justification was invented. Council is required to substantiate claims, so the information should not have to be requested. Having to correct that failure cannot be used to disadvantage this request.
My preference is to receive the information by fyi.org.nz.
Yours faithfully,
Rachael Nicoll
From: Jenny Lapham
Dunedin City Council
0.png
12K
Download
FW Cr Whiley dog questions.html
47K
Download
Procedures Redacted.pdf
14.2M
Download
View as HTML
Kia Ora
I refer to your e-mail of 7 June requesting information about the proposed
Dog Bylaw and Policy. Our responses to your questions are provided below.
[1]DCC Main Page
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If this message is not intended for you please delete it and notify us
immediately; you are warned that any further use, dissemination,
distribution or reproduction of this material by you is prohibited..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rachael Nicoll <[2][FOI #27170 email]>
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2024 9:56 am
To: Official Information <[3][Dunedin City Council request email]>
Subject: Official Information request - Review of the dog policy and bylaw
Dear Dunedin City Council,
These requests arise from the parts of the agenda of the Customer and
Regulatory meeting held 21 May 2024 about the review of the dog policy and
bylaw intended to commence next month.
This information is required to consider the information in that agenda,
allow informed discussions amongst interested parties, and provide
informed submissions in the upcoming review. The absence of the
information will prevent that occurring and negatively impact the merits
of the consultation.
Please provide the information with urgency to prevent repeating the same
disadvantage caused by failing to comply with the LGOIMA requirements in
relation to requests for the Annual Plan consultation. Noting the LGOIMA
allows information to be released in stages, and doing so will comply with
the requirement to provide it with urgency, as soon as reasonably
practicable.
Please provide the qualifications of those advising Councillors and
authoring the documentation, including the qualifications of any
consultants or external advisors.
Due to staff absences we are unable to reply to this question. Therefore
we are extending the time to reply to this question pursuant to section 14
(1)(b) of LGOIMA that consultation is necessary to make a decision of this
request, by 10 working days.
Please provide all operating guidelines relating to dog control and
management, whether called employee manuals, internal administration
policies, guide-lines or any other name.
I advise that Animal Control Officers procedures that have been easily
obtainable are attached for your information. However, as there are a
substantial number of other operating guidelines held, and pursuant to
section 17 (f) of LGOIMA, that the information requested cannot be made
without substantial collation or research, your request for the remainder
of this information is declined.
Please note that some information has been redacted pursuant to section
7(2)(a) of LGOIMA to protect the privacy of individuals (telephone
numbers) and section 6 (d) of LGOIMA to avoid endangering the safety of
any person, being the codes to the kennels.
Paragraph 11 of the Report in meeting 21 May 2024 states the Policy and
Bylaw were last reviewed in 2015/2016. This is a new claim that has not
previously made by the DCC. Please provide copies of all materials
relating to the review that occurred in 2015.
The last review of the dog control policy/bylaw commenced in 2015 and was
completed in 2016. The one review crossed two calendar years 2015/16.
The proposed Bylaw defines control as “Means the owner or person in charge
of a dog is aware of where the dog is and what it is doing, and that the
dog is responsive to commands and is not creating a nuisance.” Please
provide the legal authority for this definition.
The Dog Control Act 1996 section 5 Obligations of Dog Owners part 1 (b)
states That the obligations imposed on dog owners by this Act require
every owner of a dog – to ensure that the dog is kept under control at all
times. If you refer to the Dictionary the meaning of control is “to
exercise restraining or directing influence over”.
To provide greater clarity for Dog Owners the Council has included the
definition - “Means the owner or person in charge of a dog is aware of
where the dog is and what it is doing, and that the dog is responsive to
commands and is not creating a nuisance.”
In the meeting 21 May 2024 Cr Whiley referred to “points to consider” he
had distributed. In meeting 30 May 2024 the Chair referred to fees and
charges being discussed in workshops, and previously agreed. This is
consistent with how Council has previously dealt with dog fees and
charges.
Therefore please provide
a) the material Cr Whiley distributed
Cr Whiley’s question are attached.
b) The authority for Cr Whiley to involve himself in governance matters
concerning dogs despite being disqualified because he made a submission in
his personal capacity during the review in 2016.
Councillors frequently ask questions of staff prior to a debate to inform
the discussion. Cr Whiley does not have an interest greater than any
other Councillor, at this time, and is therefore able to participate in
the debate.
c) all other materials discussing both the old and proposed Policy/Bylaw
in any medium (whether workshops, email exchanges or other mediums) that
have not been disclosed in meeting agendas since the Ombudsman began his
preliminary investigation in 2022.
This information is declined pursuant to section 17(f) of LGOIMA as the
information requested cannot be made available without substantial
collation or research.
d) All records of discussions (whether in workshops, emails or other
mediums) about dog control related fees and charges that have not been
disclosed in meeting agendas since the Ombudsman began his preliminary
investigation in 2022.
This information is declined pursuant to section 17(f) of LGOIMA as the
information requested cannot be made available without substantial
collation or research.
6. Please provide copies of the actual submissions made during the
preliminary engagement in 2023, and the record of the general feedback
referred to in the Proposal Statement.
The information you have requested may be found via the following link,
scroll to the end of the page and click the tab that says Early Engagement
Information
[4]https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/dog...
As we have declined to provide some information you are advised that you
have the right to seek a review of this decision by the Office of the
Ombudsman.
Kā mihi
Jennifer Lapham
Mana Whakahaere Kairuruku/Governance Support Officer
Governance Group
P 03 477 4000 | E [5][email address]
Te Kaunihera a Rohe o Ōtepoti - Dunedin City Council
PO Box 5045, Dunedin 9054
New Zealand
[6]www.dunedin.govt.nz
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[7][FOI #27170 email]
Is [8][Dunedin City Council request email] the wrong address for Official
Information requests to Dunedin City Council? If so, please contact us
using this form:
[9]https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[10]https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please
ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA
page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Visible links
1. https://au-api.mimecast.com/s/click/Egr9...
2. mailto:[FOI #27170 email]
3. mailto:[Dunedin City Council request email]
4. https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/dog...
5. mailto:[email address]
6. http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/
7. mailto:[FOI #27170 email]
8. mailto:[Dunedin City Council request email]
9. https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
10. https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
From: Jenny Lapham
Dunedin City Council
Kia Ora
I refer to my response (below) to your request for information relating to
the proposed Dog Control Bylaw and Policy. In my response I advised that
we would extend the time to respond to the question regarding the report
writers qualifications due to the need to undertake consultation.
I advise that 2 of the staff members concerned are on leave, and we have
therefore been unable to consult with them about releasing their personal
information. We are therefore declining to provide this information for
these staff members pursuant to Section 7(2)(a) of LGOIMA to protect the
privacy of individuals. The third author/authoriser has a BA Hons.
It has also been raised that an alarm code was left unredacted in some of
the information provided. The unredacted code was not an active code and
therefore did not require to be redacted, but I apologise for any concern
that this may have caused you.
As we have declined to provide some information you are advised that you
have the right to seek a review by the Office of the Ombudsman.
Kā mihi
Jennifer Lapham
Mana Whakahaere Kairuruku/Governance Support Officer
Governance Group
P 03 477 4000 | E [1][email address]
Te Kaunihera a Rohe o Ōtepoti - Dunedin City Council
PO Box 5045, Dunedin 9054
New Zealand
[2]www.dunedin.govt.nz
[3]DCC Main Page
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If this message is not intended for you please delete it and notify us
immediately; you are warned that any further use, dissemination,
distribution or reproduction of this material by you is prohibited..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jenny Lapham
Sent: Monday, 8 July 2024 4:29 p.m.
To: [4][FOI #27170 email]
Subject: FW: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
(LGOIMA) Request
Kia Ora
I refer to your e-mail of 7 June requesting information about the proposed
Dog Bylaw and Policy. Our responses to your questions are provided below.
From: Rachael Nicoll <[5][FOI #27170 email]>
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2024 9:56 am
To: Official Information <[6][Dunedin City Council request email]>
Subject: Official Information request - Review of the dog policy and bylaw
Dear Dunedin City Council,
These requests arise from the parts of the agenda of the Customer and
Regulatory meeting held 21 May 2024 about the review of the dog policy and
bylaw intended to commence next month.
This information is required to consider the information in that agenda,
allow informed discussions amongst interested parties, and provide
informed submissions in the upcoming review. The absence of the
information will prevent that occurring and negatively impact the merits
of the consultation.
Please provide the information with urgency to prevent repeating the same
disadvantage caused by failing to comply with the LGOIMA requirements in
relation to requests for the Annual Plan consultation. Noting the LGOIMA
allows information to be released in stages, and doing so will comply with
the requirement to provide it with urgency, as soon as reasonably
practicable.
Please provide the qualifications of those advising Councillors and
authoring the documentation, including the qualifications of any
consultants or external advisors.
Due to staff absences we are unable to reply to this question. Therefore
we are extending the time to reply to this question pursuant to section 14
(1)(b) of LGOIMA that consultation is necessary to make a decision of this
request, by 10 working days.
Please provide all operating guidelines relating to dog control and
management, whether called employee manuals, internal administration
policies, guide-lines or any other name.
I advise that Animal Control Officers procedures that have been easily
obtainable are attached for your information. However, as there are a
substantial number of other operating guidelines held, and pursuant to
section 17 (f) of LGOIMA, that the information requested cannot be made
without substantial collation or research, your request for the remainder
of this information is declined.
Please note that some information has been redacted pursuant to section
7(2)(a) of LGOIMA to protect the privacy of individuals (telephone
numbers) and section 6 (d) of LGOIMA to avoid endangering the safety of
any person, being the codes to the kennels.
Paragraph 11 of the Report in meeting 21 May 2024 states the Policy and
Bylaw were last reviewed in 2015/2016. This is a new claim that has not
previously made by the DCC. Please provide copies of all materials
relating to the review that occurred in 2015.
The last review of the dog control policy/bylaw commenced in 2015 and was
completed in 2016. The one review crossed two calendar years 2015/16.
The proposed Bylaw defines control as “Means the owner or person in charge
of a dog is aware of where the dog is and what it is doing, and that the
dog is responsive to commands and is not creating a nuisance.” Please
provide the legal authority for this definition.
The Dog Control Act 1996 section 5 Obligations of Dog Owners part 1 (b)
states That the obligations imposed on dog owners by this Act require
every owner of a dog – to ensure that the dog is kept under control at all
times. If you refer to the Dictionary the meaning of control is “to
exercise restraining or directing influence over”.
To provide greater clarity for Dog Owners the Council has included the
definition - “Means the owner or person in charge of a dog is aware of
where the dog is and what it is doing, and that the dog is responsive to
commands and is not creating a nuisance.”
In the meeting 21 May 2024 Cr Whiley referred to “points to consider” he
had distributed. In meeting 30 May 2024 the Chair referred to fees and
charges being discussed in workshops, and previously agreed. This is
consistent with how Council has previously dealt with dog fees and
charges.
Therefore please provide
a) the material Cr Whiley distributed
Cr Whiley’s question are attached.
b) The authority for Cr Whiley to involve himself in governance matters
concerning dogs despite being disqualified because he made a submission in
his personal capacity during the review in 2016.
Councillors frequently ask questions of staff prior to a debate to inform
the discussion. Cr Whiley does not have an interest greater than any
other Councillor, at this time, and is therefore able to participate in
the debate.
c) all other materials discussing both the old and proposed Policy/Bylaw
in any medium (whether workshops, email exchanges or other mediums) that
have not been disclosed in meeting agendas since the Ombudsman began his
preliminary investigation in 2022.
This information is declined pursuant to section 17(f) of LGOIMA as the
information requested cannot be made available without substantial
collation or research.
d) All records of discussions (whether in workshops, emails or other
mediums) about dog control related fees and charges that have not been
disclosed in meeting agendas since the Ombudsman began his preliminary
investigation in 2022.
This information is declined pursuant to section 17(f) of LGOIMA as the
information requested cannot be made available without substantial
collation or research.
6. Please provide copies of the actual submissions made during the
preliminary engagement in 2023, and the record of the general feedback
referred to in the Proposal Statement.
The information you have requested may be found via the following link,
scroll to the end of the page and click the tab that says Early Engagement
Information
[7]https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/dog...
As we have declined to provide some information you are advised that you
have the right to seek a review of this decision by the Office of the
Ombudsman.
Kā mihi
Jennifer Lapham
Mana Whakahaere Kairuruku/Governance Support Officer
Governance Group
P 03 477 4000 | E [8][email address]
Te Kaunihera a Rohe o Ōtepoti - Dunedin City Council
PO Box 5045, Dunedin 9054
New Zealand
[9]www.dunedin.govt.nz
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[10][FOI #27170 email]
Is [11][Dunedin City Council request email] the wrong address for Official
Information requests to Dunedin City Council? If so, please contact us
using this form:
[12]https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[13]https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please
ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA
page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/
3. https://au-api.mimecast.com/s/click/F2A4...
4. mailto:[FOI #27170 email]
5. mailto:[FOI #27170 email]
6. mailto:[Dunedin City Council request email]
7. https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/dog...
8. mailto:[email address]
9. http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/
10. mailto:[FOI #27170 email]
11. mailto:[Dunedin City Council request email]
12. https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
13. https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence (note: this contains the same information already available above).
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this request