Agenda item

To consider a report by the Head of Planning and Public Protection and Public Protection Manager (copy attached) on the progress made against the Council’s Dog Fouling Strategy and seeking members’ support for the work undertaken to tackle dog fouling in the county.

10.10 a.m. – 10.40 a.m.

Councillor David Smith, Lead Member for Public Realm introduced the report and associated appendices (previously circulated) on progress made against the Council’s Dog Fouling Strategy and detailed the number of reported incidents and known hot spots.

 

Members were advised that the Dog Fouling Strategy formed an integral part of the Council’s corporate priority of ensuring clean and tidy streets.  The problem of dog fouling was raised with councillors by residents on a regular basis and whilst the Council could never eliminate the problem, recent data was definitely showing a reduction in the number of reported incidents and considered a success overall.  Denbighshire had been the first Council to engage Kingdom Security Ltd to undertake certain aspects of environmental crime enforcement work, however five out of the six North Wales authorities now commissioned them to undertake enforcement work on their behalf and UK wide they were engaged by 35 authorities.  Responding to members’ questions the Lead Member, Public Protection and Streetscene Service officers advised that –

 

·         Kingdom were managed on the Council’s behalf by the Council’s Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer and any queries/complaints regarding their work should be directed to him

·         currently there were no enforceable prohibition orders relating to dogs on beaches, there may be historical by-laws and the only way to enforce these was by instigating court proceedings

·         with a view to improving the Council’s enforcement powers in relation to dog fouling officers were proposing to introduce Pubic Space Protection Orders (PSPOs).  These Orders, which Councils could make under powers conferred on them in the Anti-Social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014, could include excluding dogs from certain land and/or require dogs to be on a lead in certain areas.  The Council expected to be in a position to consult on the proposed Orders before the end of the year, as officers were at present in the process of identifying the most appropriate areas for designation within the Orders

·         despite numerous requests to the Police they had not engaged with the Council for the purpose of enforcement action in relation to dog fouling, they were also very reluctant to share information with the Council on dog fouling incidents

·         concerns relating to dangerous dogs should be referred to the Police as it was a criminal matter rather than a civil enforcement matter

·         where there was a high concentration of dog fouling incidents officers would highlight the fact by marking the pavements with yellow chalk once the Streetscene officers had cleared up the mess.  This approach formed part of the promotional campaign to reduce dog fouling

·         ‘hotspots’ were designated based on the number of incidents reported by councillors and/or members of the public in specific areas and recorded on the CRM system

·         during the last six months approximately 82 complaints had been received by the Council against Kingdom, this equated roughly to less than 2% of the Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) issued for environmental crime offences.  Upon receipt of a complaint the Council’s Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer would review all the evidence submitted, including footage from the Enforcement Officer’s body camera, before determining whether or not to uphold the complaint.  In all cases he would write to the complainant outlining his decision and the basis of his determination

·         if complaints against staff employed by Kingdom were judged to be founded the Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer would inform Kingdom and they would deal with them in accordance with the terms of the Council’s contract with them.  Staff had been removed out of the area via this procedure during the term of the Council’s contract with Kingdom

·         the Public Protection Manager and the Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer undertook random checks on body camera footage to check behaviours etc. on a monthly basis

·         there had been incidents of Kingdom staff being assaulted by disgruntled members of the public

·         Internal Audit had recently reviewed the work of the Service and Kingdom and a report, which was on the whole a very positive one, was due to be presented to the Corporate Governance Committee imminently

·         a higher number of dog fouling incidents tended to be recorded during January, probably due to either people letting their dogs out unaccompanied and due to the reduced number of daylight hours which impaired the visibility required to successfully evidence alleged offences.  Staffing rotas for the Streetscene Service during the winter period from now on should assist to address this problem to a certain extent

·         public space CCTV cameras had recently been purchased for the purpose of deploying in ‘hotspots’ to gather evidence.  These were compact cameras that recorded footage when triggered by movement.  However the law did not permit covert use of the cameras and therefore clear warning signs had to be erected that CCTV cameras were operating in the area

·         the Service had considered the option of adopting a dog DNA database approach, similar to the one operating in Barking and Dagenham and under consideration in Flintshire, for the purpose of reducing dog fouling.  However it was considered to be too expensive an option to deal with the problem.  Nevertheless it may yet be considered again sometime in the future

·         Streetscene staff were actively engaging with dog walkers providing them with advice stickers, appropriate bags etc. whilst also gathering intelligence for the Council on any patterns or trends that were occurring within their areas

·         the Council was also actively trying to seek intelligence from members of the public in ‘hotspot’ areas in a bid to apprehend known offenders.  However whilst the public were willing to provide verbal evidence to officers they were reluctant to provide written statements or testify as witnesses if required.  Nevertheless, any soft evidence provided to officers could prove useful eventually in order to take enforcement action

·         enforcement officers were required to inform a person suspected of committing an environmental crime that the interview was being recorded.  The cameras were not activated until the alleged offence had been committed, therefore there would be no footage of the actual offence

·         that FPNs had been issued in Mount Wood in Denbigh

·         between 5 and 7 enforcement officers patrolled areas of the county at any one time, some patrolled outside of the standard 9.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. time in order to try and catch persistent offenders

·         Kingdom officers were permitted to patrol covertly in plain clothes for the purpose of policing and issuing FPNs for dog fouling.  They were not allowed to patrol in plain clothes for the purpose of detecting other types of environmental crime.  Incidents when these rules had been contravened had come to light and in those cases  Kingdom had been reprimanded for contravening the rules of the contract

·         if councillors or residents had concerns about the behaviour of Kingdom officers they should report them immediately to the Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer or the Public Protection Manager

·         circa 3000 FPNs were issued in Denbighshire in a 12 month period, the highest number issued in any local authority in North Wales.  Approximately 2% of those issued with a FPN lodged a formal complaint against its issue and proceeded to appeal, a minority of those appeals were upheld

·         Kingdom’s income from its contract with the Council was partly based on a set contract fee, and part income generation per FPN it issued

·         if it was the Council’s wish for the service to be provided in-house that could be done, but it would need to secure funding to enable that to take place

·         litter in and around schools reduced drastically during school holiday periods.  Discussions were underway with Keep Wales Tidy with a view to delivering sessions to year 6 pupils to educate them about the importance of keeping the environment tidy in a bid to instil a sense of pride in them that would be sustained throughout their lives and be sustained from one generation to the next.  The possibility of securing funding to run a pilot of the programme within Ysgol Brynhyfryd’s feeder schools was currently being explored

·         a sustained anti-dog fouling public relations campaign was required in order to keep its profile high.  With this in mind officers were in discussion with the Head of Customers, Communications and Marketing with a view to progressing the campaign on a regular basis via social media, and

·         that scrutiny may wish to be consulted on the draft PSPOs in due course.

 

In response to an alleged smoking related FPN incident involving officers from Kingdom and an elderly gentleman, reported in the press earlier in the week, the Head of Service and Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer advised that the matter had since been satisfactorily resolved.

 

Members –

 

·         suggested that once the PSPOs had been agreed and made it may be appropriate for enforcement staff, including Kingdom, to inform and educate people about them initially before actually taking any enforcement actions against contraventions

·         asked that Ystrad Road, Denbigh through towards Brookhouse, and Central Park football ground Denbigh be visited to determine whether they should be included in the ‘dog fouling hotspot’ list

·         when drawing up proposed PSPOs care should be taken in areas where there was a shortage of areas to exercise dogs to strike an appropriate balance between the need for safe recreational areas for children and the public and those of dog walkers/owners.  Rhuddlan was cited as an example, in particular Admiral’s Playing Fields

·         requested that Mount Wood, Denbigh also be considered as a potential area for a PSPO, and

·         requested that an element of flexibility and a common sense approach be introduced to the issuing of FPNs during large events, such as the Rhyl Air Show, where members of the public could not deposit litter etc. in the bins provided due to them being full capacity.  Officers did confirm that enforcement staff would be advised to use their discretion at such events and assume more of an advisory role.  The Environmental Services Team would also be on hand to empty bins etc., immediately crowds had dispersed.

 

At the conclusion of the discussion officers undertook to provide members with the latest information on the number of complaints lodged against Kingdom via the Council’s ‘Your Voice’ Corporate Complaints procedure and to re-introduce the quarterly statistical report to members on the number of FPNs issued.  It was –

 

RESOLVED that, subject to the above observations, to support the excellent work undertaken by officers across services to tackle dog fouling in the county.