077/2013: Formation of Joint NYP and City of York Council Anti Social Behaviour Hub – 5 November 2013

Executive Summary and recommendation:

It is proposed to form a joint Anti Social Behaviour (ASB) hub between North Yorkshire Police and City of York Council. The hub will be based at CYC’s West Offices. NYP’s contribution to the hub will be 6 x PC s, realigned from current Beat Manager posts in York. As a minimum the council have already identified 6 posts, known as Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers (NEOs), that would work alongside the current Inspector led SNA police officers and PCSO’s. Further funding from such as the Police Innovation Fund, the City of York Council development fund and other sources is being sought, and if bids are successful this will be used to bolster the council NEOs in the hub. In order to maximise visibility and the impact of the proposal it is believed that a total of 12 CSAS accredited Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers are required at the start of the programme.

The hub will allow ASB to be dealt with in a more coordinated and efficient way, ensuring the correct resources are deployed to incidents in a timely manner. The proposed joint review and risk assessment process will assist with identifying trends and patterns across council and police data sets, and inform a proactive approach to tackling ASB.

As all ASB will be reviewed by the hub members of the public will get the most appropriate resources attending the incident regardless of who they have reported the incident to.

It is recommended that the Exec Board approve the formation of the joint City of York Council and NYP ASB hub and co-located CYC enforcement officers with Inspector led SNA’s, based on the proposal detailed in this paper.

Police and Crime Commissioner decision: Approved. An evaluation will take place after 6 months to cover factors which enable consideration of the operational impact; future opportunities; and to assess the overall value in terms of outcomes.

Signature Date 5 November 2013
Title Police & Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire

Part 1 – Unrestricted facts and advice to the PCC

Introduction and background

Anti-social behaviour is a significant area of demand with high community impact in North Yorkshire and the City of York. Current volumes for York show 12,000 ASB incidents that are reported to Police and 3500 reported to City of York Council. Many of these incidents involve more than one of the services in place to support ASB resolution. Key Council related subjects are drug related litter, fly tipping and litter, and noise complaints. These clearly overlap with the types of ASB reports received to NYP.

Police ASB now falls in to one of 3 categories Environmental, Nuisance and Personal. Of these NYP only reviews those that fall within the Personal category through the vulnerable risk assessments process (VRA’s), with local safer neighbourhood teams undertaking responsibility to deal with any highlighted as low or medium risk. High risk VRA’s are referred on to a Multi Agency Problem Solving group (MAPS) where they are assessed and allocated to the most appropriate agency. In order for the NYP Beat Manager to deal effectively with those low or medium risk that are not referred to MAPS they have to contact partners, arrange a separate multi agency meeting and then progress through a problem solving plan; all of which takes time to organise and facilitate.

The City of York Council currently do not have any review process that assesses the risk level of their anti-social behaviour incidents which have been received through their own reporting methods.

The journey currently experienced for the communities of York is dependant upon which organisation they contact. Regular customer feedback shows that confusion on which organisation will deal with anti social issues has led to customers being transferred between organisations. At present, if a resident contacts NYP and we dispatch a resource who identifies that the issue is a CYC area of business we either re-direct the customer to contact the Council or attempt to have a member of CYC contact them. This is evident in reverse also. However, there is a time lag and opportunity for the customer to be left in ‘no mans land’ between agencies.

Following enquiries through HMIC regional contacts it appears that the proposed operating model for the hub and combined co-locating of frontline Police and Council enforcement resources is a unique approach. Incidents will be dealt with by the most appropriate resources regardless of the route the member of the public has taken to report the incident. By having both police and the council conducting a joint risk assessment, means that the most appropriate resource(s) from either organisation are deployed to the incident, at the earliest opportunity.

Matters for consideration

The concept is to create a multi-agency hub in York that will review and be the conduit to resolving all ASB incidents in York, regardless of which agency they present to initially. The 7 days a week ASB hub will provide a platform which will allow both NYP & CYC to review together all three types of ASB incidents reported in the previous 24 hour period. This will be achieved through collocating CYC and NYP resources within a single building (CYC West Offices) where they will have access to both ASB data sources and the Safer York Partnership analytical capability. The membership of the hub will include those departments which will have the capability to respond early and effectively deal with any type of reported ASB.

Members would include :-

• Dedicated Neighbourhood Police officers with specialist skills in ASB legislation application (working an operational shift pattern).
• Tenancy Enforcement Officers (TET)
• Neighbourhood Dispute Mediation Services
• Trading Standards
• Troubled Families Representative
• Noise Abatement Officers
• Neighbourhood Management Officers (NMO)
• Safer York Partnership Analyst.

The Hub would be run on a daily basis by a CYC Office Manager located with the team and supported by the York Operational Delivery Inspector who would retain line management of the NYP resources from Fulford Road Police Station. Second line management would be the Director of Safer York Partnership with support from the Chief Inspector, Deputy Commander for York SNC.

The Hub would risk assess each ASB report and would themselves maintain ownership of any High Risk or suitable Medium Risk incidents that required a focussed partnership approach. For example, the dedicated Police Officers would own high risk VRA’s and would represent these cases at the MAPS meetings. Their specialist skill sets would also be responsible for applications under ASBO, CRASBO, ASBI and other anti social behaviour powers such as DPPO’s, premise closure orders and dispersal orders. These are currently carried out by a few of the dedicated beat managers and the full potential of ASB civil powers are not fully exploited due to lack of confidence and knowledge in these specialist areas.

The Police Officers within the Hub would work an operational shift pattern to ensure they are able to deal with neighbour disputes, licensing visits and delivery of proactive ASB operations, including the night time economy.

Linkages to other partners and partnerships

To enable the hub to effectively tackle the full range of ASB reported, it would also be necessary for the group to call upon additional specialised skill sets when required. These would include:-

• Licensing
• Public Health & Well Being
• Education
• Adult & Children’s Social Care
• Legal Support
• Youth Offending Teams, Integrated Offender Management & Probation Services
• Neighbourhood Care Teams (Clinical Commissioning Groups)

There would also be future opportunities to integrate some of these services into the ASB hub. For example, the proposed Neighbourhood Care Teams being developed by the Clinical Commissioning Group will compliment the Inspector led teams and offer opportunities to embed a health dimension to problem solving. A further example, would be the tasking of Probation Service Community Payback Scheme in to areas where a visible presence of positive justice would have an impact on the ability of local communities to feel safe. All tasking of agencies not within the Hub will be dealt with through the ASB hub referral process or MAPS meetings.

The Hub would integrate in to NIM processes within York SNC with continued SYP and ODI Inspector attendance at the Tactical Tasking & Coordinating Group meetings, where identified priorities can be raised by the Hub and actions taken away by them.

Following the morning review of ASB incidents by the Hub, a member of the ASB Hub would represent at the local NYP York Daily Management Meeting where they would provide an update to the local NYP management team of the previous 24 hours ASB, any activity tasked out from their review and review patrol activity to be undertaken over the following 24hours. This will feed into the overall Force tasking and DMM processes.

The difference for the community will be an increase in the satisfaction with the services they receive. With one phone call made, a victim of ASB will receive a multi-agency service irrespective of which agency to whom they report the incident. The tiering of response to high, medium and low incidents will ensure that the gravity of response is proportionate to the level of harm experienced. Communities will feel safer when they know and can see agencies working together in the community.

The ASB Hub is a model which has been developed similarly and deployed by Bedfordshire Constabulary in the town of Luton, which is similar in make up to York. Inspector Jon Naughton has visited Luton to assess the delivery of the model and found that it has assisted with them achieving reductions in ASB of around 12%. Whilst this is comparable to reductions seen in York the benefits seen by Luton which are not currently seen in York are the fast time response by multi agencies when dealing with ASB incidents committed the previous day. Bedfordshire Constabulary are now in the process of expanding the model.

Leeds Council launched its community trigger on anti-social behaviour on 4 July 2013. If an individual reports the same incident of anti-social behaviour three times, it will activate the community trigger for local agencies to address. The proposal of the ASB Hub will be able to deal with incidents of this type through its daily review process and will ensure if the recording is repeated across different agencies, this is still flagged as a community need. In Leeds a similar ASB Hub and review system has also been initiated to support better community processes, however, this is only focussed on Police requests for service.

With the need to deliver more for less and to sustain the current reduction in ASB both the Local Authority and North Yorkshire Police have to ensure that the number of deployable resources available to both organisations are capable of being transformed to deliver enhanced community services.

The Police Reform Act 2002 enables Chief Constables to grant specific policing powers to private, public or third sector organisations providing that the holder of the accreditation is a registered employee. This is known as Community Safety Accreditation Scheme (CSAS). Using these powers we are able to allow ‘Enforcement Officers’ within the council to undertake a broader range of duties within their current ASB work and work in partnership with the Police. This will in turn, reduce demand as work will be more efficiently tasked and directed through a single individual rather than requiring multiple services to attend.

Furthermore, the additional benefit of a person with designated CSAS powers is that it becomes a criminal offence under the Police Reform Act 2002 to assault, obstruct or resist a designated person or person assisting a designated person in the execution of their duty. This is an offence which does not currently offer support to CYC employees conducting enforcement duties for the Local Authority.

It is envisaged that the CSAS Enforcement Officer will be able to utilise both Local Authority and authorised CSAS Powers to deal with the following types of ASB incidents.

• Parking offences
• Abandoned vehicles *
• Cycling on the footpath *
• Power to deal with begging *
• Causing harassment alarm & distress *
• Knowingly giving false alarm of fire
• Drinking in a designated public area *
• Fly Tipping
• Fly Posting
• Graffiti*
• Littering *
• Dog Fouling
• Powers to seize tobacco & alcohol from young people *
• Traffic management, including stopping vehicles for testing and traffic control.
• Noise Complaints
• ASB in parks and open spaces *
• Fireworks offences *

The listed areas with an asterisk overlap with current NYP PCSO powers. Should this proposal be approved, it would therefore offer opportunities to re-direct PCSO tasking to other priority areas for the community.

A full list of the 43 CSAS powers are attached at Appendix A. Work is underway to confirm which of these powers and the Local authority may wish to consider any of these additional ones which may assist the delivery of their Strategic Plan.

Having defined which powers are appropriate to the needs of the City of York, they themselves could review the processes and structures of several departments which currently carry out these functions to create efficiencies. Furthermore, by then creating the single ‘CSAS Enforcement Officer’ role there is an ability for the Local Authority to deploy a proactive patrolling function during key times (ASB volumes data suggests 0900hrs x 0300hrs) with the ability for CSAS officers to resolve a wide range of ASB issues which currently CYC employees are restricted to dealing with in very specialist functional terms. For example, a parking warden cannot currently deal with a littering offence or noise complaint.

In order to accommodate CSAS Enforcement Officers into the Safer Neighbourhood Teams and also consider the impacts of the resourcing that is required to support the dedicated PC’s for the ASB hub, a review of NYP SNC York structures has been considered. This takes into account not only resource moves but also the impact of new processes and responsibilities being moved as a result of the ASB Hub.

Firstly, the current 3 Inspector led Safer Neighbourhood Areas (York City & East, North and West) would remain with the same geographical boundaries. Currently the make up of those teams is split between 24/7 patrol services made up of 5 bands (to remain) and then 3 non-24/7 dedicated neighbourhood policing teams, each led by a problem solving Sergeant.

Each of the three SNA’s has 5 or 6 Beat Manager PC’s and between 15 and 23 PCSO’s. In total York SNC has 17 dedicated Beat manager PC’s and 63 PCSO’s. Those Beat Managers currently deal with all aspects of ASB and problem solving, supported by the PCSO’s.

With the creation of the ASB Hub many of the longer term ASB problem solving tactics would be completed and owned by the dedicated Officers and CYC staff within the Hub, thereby removing much of the time consuming work carried out by Beat Managers.

As such, it is proposed to redistribute 6 of the current Beat Manager posts to form the ASB Hub dedicated PC posts and restructure the remaining dedicated neighbourhood team resources in the 3 SNA’s to have 1 x problem solving Sergeant, 2 x Dedicated Safer Neighbourhood Service Delivery PC’s, 3 x teams of PCSO’s and 6 x CYC Enforcement Officers with Local Authority and Community Safety Accreditation Powers (CSAS), authorised by the Chief Constable.

The first line management responsibility for the CSAS Officers would fall to the CYC Office Manager in the ASB Hub, with priority patrol activity designed by them. This would be supported through daily tasking and productivity being supervised by the NYP Problem Solving Sergeant, taking cognisance of the CYC priority areas for their ASB demand.

The service delivered by each of these 3 teams would be focussed on safer neighbourhood enforcement and engagement services that focus upon early intervention and enforcement for low and some medium level ASB, community reassurance and engagement, victim of crime visits and prevention initiatives. The wide range of civil and criminal powers available to the teams as a result of collocating NYP and CYC resources would ensure a quick time response is available to deal with calls for service received by either agency. Tasking of these resources could be either directed through a single point (NYP FCR) or dual points of the FCR and CYC CCTV Control Room. Both these options would need to be considered as part of the further investigation work required in the next steps. It is possible to provide CYC CSAS staff with airwaves radios through a TEA2 licence agreement and thereby create the ability to live time deploy and update through either the FCR or CYC CCTV control room.

In order to support the current enforcement of ASB activities the council already have a dedicated legal post. It is envisaged that the pro-active and bolstered resources in the hub will generate additional need for legal services. The council are planning to increase the current support into the team, and have agreed to be the primary point of advice for the team, and to provide any further legal assistance that is required. Any issues relating to criminal offences or requiring force involvement will be referred to CPS or NYP Legal Services as required.

From a customer perspective, the community would benefit from a joined up approach to ASB resolution. For example, where a report of ASB (nuisance neighbour) is received by CYC and at the following ASB Hub review it is deemed low level or via live time tasking it is allocated to a dedicated SNDT PCSO who visits and explains to the resident that they are there to deal with the report made to the Local Authority. NYP resource reacting to CYC report. This is also reversed when a NYP report is received which is suitable for a CSAS officer to attend.

To enable the Local Authority staff to become CSAS accredited they must undertake a verified training package that delivers instruction on the powers authorised by the Chief Constable. This training can be provided by the Chief Constable or outsourced to an accredited training supplier. In order for the powers to be a legally transferred a formal agreement will be drawn up between NYP and CoYC. This agreement will be based upon a formal request that will be made by the council detailing the actual powers they wish their staff to exercise.

Other CSAS schemes run by Forces around the Country charge participants for the setting up of CSAS powers along with initial and ongoing training costs. The costs vary between each Force and 2 examples are contained within Appendix E. Both are within ACPO recommendations for service charges.

Whilst there is a business case to apply for charging for CSAS powers, the proposed model will deliver an enhanced level of service to the public through closer and more responsive working between NYP and CYC. It will also provide opportunities for both organisations to achieve efficiency savings in terms of reduced demand that is more efficiently tasked and directed. Due to this it is proposed to not charge the Local Authority for the administration and set up costs for the scheme.

A number of training options have been considered:

• NYP increase the capacity for Training Services to deliver the initial CSAS training including mainstreaming the training of CSAS staff in to NYP safer neighbourhood team training days. This would be at NYP cost.
• CYC outsource the training to an ACPO authorised service which can be verified externally. This would be at CYC cost.
• The training is managed using NYP Training Services but the package delivery is outsourced to a private company. The benefit of this is that NYP have control of the type of training delivered in order to meet CSAS requirements and future joint training delivered through NYP would build upon the initial training given.

Of these options an external training provider managed through NYP Training services offers the most cost effective and timely method of delivering the training. Training providers have been approached and indicative costs are available and estimated in the finance appendix of the paper. Actual training costs cannot be finalised until the council staff numbers are confirmed. Bids to cover the cost of training will be raised through the Police Innovation Fund, failing this it is proposed for NYP to fund the cost of providing the initial training to council staff. Further training for new members of staff or annual refresher training costs will be borne by the council. Indicative costs for training are available at Appendices B, C and D depending upon which staffing model the council are able to adopt.

The deployment of CSAS powers through a dedicated enforcement team is employed in the Unitary Authority of Stockton, Cleveland and has been for over 7 years. Both NYP and CYC representatives have undertaken visits to observe the scheme and whilst the demographics of Stockton are not fully comparable with the City of York many of the ASB incidents were and the use of CSAS powers have been shown to be effective.

Based on the findings from research and the best practice identified from other ASB hubs local processes and the risk assessment have been developed for deployment in York. Testing and then refinement of these is being planned for mid-November. The High-level process map is shown below.

Whilst things have progressed well in terms of discussions between organisations and the working arrangements have largely been agreed. There are still some issues outstanding, that will be worked through prior to the formation of the hub in Spring 2014. These are:

• The size of the hub will be dictated by the number of staff the council are able to contribute to the team. There are potentially 3 operating models for this with 6, 12 or 18 Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers. As a minimum 6 posts have already been identified, and funding for additional posts is being explored through council funding options, the Police Innovation Fund, and the potential to use some of the funding from the Late Night Levy if this is introduced. Neither of these funding streams can be confirmed at this time. The preferred option would be to begin the programme with 12 CSAS staff in order to show visible investment and response to the community. Fewer than 12 officers will restrict the ability to create an effective shift pattern that covers the identified key times for ASB.
• Once the size of the team has been confirmed there may be a need for additional equipment to support the staff such as vehicles, body cams and airwaves radios. Should both organisations deem the programme worthy of future investment then investment in mobile technology for receiving and updating tasks would also benefit. This could include use of SMART technology that allows the community to report ASB from the site using SMART phone applications. These reports could then task the appropriate resource to attend.
• A single CYC IT system that will allow staff to properly risk assess and manage incidents through to resolution would greatly benefit the hub. This is complicated by the number of different systems that are currently used to manage ASB incidents across the 2 organisations. Whilst NYP have NICHE and STORM which will allow live time risk assessments to be conducted the CYC have 5 separate systems which are not integrated and require separate user training for each. Options for this are being explored, and any funding required for this would be bid for through the Police Innovation Fund and CYC Development Fund. Short term solutions are also currently being explored to prevent the delay of any introduction.

Regardless of the outcome of bids to the Police Innovation Fund, or other potential sources such as the Late Night Levy there will be no additional requirement for funds, other than those already identified in this paper, to support the hub from NYP. It is worth considering though that NYP investment in to the ASB Hub and CSAS programme may require the allocation of some NYP funds to create future benefits and efficiencies.

Other options considered, if any

The formation of the joint CSAS ASB hub is bringing together what are currently disparate services across separate organisations. This proposal is building upon best practice already in operation in a number of Council and Police services across the country. However, none of those appear to run the hub and frontline enforcement teams as a truly joint, collocated service where police officers will sit alongside council specialists and jointly review ASB incidents on a daily basis along with shared premises for deployment of teams working directly with communities. This is considered to be the most appropriate model for the City Of York.

Contribution to Police and Crime Plan outcomes

The use of the two ASB concepts provides the risk assessment and management platforms to remove the current shortfalls in ASB processes and enhance the customer experience for those who suffer the effects of ASB. Key outcomes are:

• The combining of resources and use of CSAS powers enables both organisations to maximise available civil and criminal powers to deliver enhanced services with fewer dedicated resources and removes the need for individual isolated skill sets.
• A fast time assessment and response capability to deliver against calls for service around ASB that then reduces the risks to vulnerable victims and communities by having dedicated professional resources of both organisations working within the same team with the ability to problem solve on a daily basis. This will also ensure the most appropriate agency drives the delivery of services for victims.
• Efficiency savings are available for both organisations.
1. The new SNA model only requires 12 of the 17 beat managers currently funded in York SNC. This could release 5 officers back to 24/7 patrol duties.
2. CYC amalgamation of roles could reduce the need for several individual departments and can combine several skill sets in to the CSAS role.
3. The overlapping of CSAS and PCSO skill sets means that there may be an opportunity to redistribute PCSO priorities whilst enhancing service delivery. This could be scaled against any future investment by CYC in to CSAS powers.
• The model can be scaled up or down to fit with the location and style of Local authority within North Yorkshire. The number of officers contained within the delivery platforms is proportionate to the Command in which it is based. Early testing of this idea with Selby SNC believed this to be viable outwith a Unitary Authority arrangement. Two-tier authorities could have Local District Authorities being aligned in the ASB hub with NYCC resources being drawn upon when required for specialist problem solving.
• Having dedicated professional resources with the right skill sets will provide effective training for fixed penalty notices and/or penalty notices for disorder and therefore the demand on the Criminal Justice Sector will be reduced.

Consultations carried out

Both the Federation and Unison have been informed about this proposal. There is only a very limited impact on a small number of officers who will need to have their place of duty changed from existing York stations to West Offices in York. A detailed comms plan is attached at Appendix H.

Financial Implications/Value for money

Appendix B, C, D lists the costs and potential income generation opportunities for the 3 scenarios that are being considered as part of this proposal i.e.

• Appendix B – joint hub with 6 x PCs and 6 x Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers,
• Appendix C – joint hub with 6 x PCs and 12 x Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers,
• Appendix D – joint hub with 6 x PCs and 18 x Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers

At this stage of the proposal some of the costs and income generation opportunities are not known and/or can only be estimated. Work is on-going and will continue. A number of the items listed are not essential for the formation of the hub, but would improve its effectiveness. A case for these will be raised through the Police Innovation Fund. Some of the funding for the council team will be on a negative funding model. This will mean the team will need to generate income from some of their activities such as the issue of tickets for certain offences; the staff will be SIA (Security Industry Accredited) allowing them to provide some security services that the council currently need to contract out; PCSOs could be given some additional powers that will allow them to issue tickets on behalf of the council, ensuring the revenue from ticket payments goes back to the council. Following discussions with the Chief Executive of the Council it is agreed that the issuing of tickets will not be used as a revenue generating tool but as a properly focussed ASB enforcement activity in areas where the community have identified the benefits. As such, any additional powers being considered for PCSO’s will only be adopted if they enhance their ability to carry out their current primary role as opposed to creating a new element to their role. Unison will be consulted prior to any additional powers being proposed.

Chief Constable’s Chief Finance Officer Comments:

There is no specific provision in the MTFP for the capital or revenue costs associated with this project. If approved the capital could be funded from the Plant & Equipment rolling programme, should the Innovation Fund bid be unsuccessful. Revenue setup costs will need to be funded from the general forecast underspend this year.

A number of the figures quoted are speculative, depending on the outcome of decisions made elsewhere. If the proposal is approved, I will arrange for a detailed budget to be prepared based on firm figures as known for inclusion in the budget and MTFP. We will then monitor developments and would be in a position to amend the budget at a later stage, once all the information is confirmed.

Financially, it would be prudent to select Option 1 initially, with growth to Options 2 or 3 only progressed once the outcome of the Innovation Fund bid is known.

Legal Implications

As already stated the council legal services have agreed to be the primary escalation route for advice and legal action generated from the hub. NYP Legal Services or CPS will be called upon to support the council for instances where they are better placed to deal with a situation. The council already have plans in place to bolster the legal support available to the hub.

A formal agreement will be drawn up between NYP and CYC that identifies the additional powers that the Council Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers (NEOs – formerly Street Enforcement Officers) will be granted under the CSAS legislation. This process is initiated by the Council who will formally request the relevant powers from the Chief Constable. The list of extra powers that the council expect to request is as Appendix F. Additionally it is proposed to consider York PCSOs being granted additional powers to be able to issue tickets that currently only council staff members issue. These powers would be formally requested from the Council Chief Executive. The proposed list of powers which can be considered is at Appendix G.

Having read this report and having considered such information as has been provided at the time of being asked to express this view, the Deputy Force Solicitor is satisfied that this report does not ask the PCC for North Yorkshire to make a decision which would (or would be likely to) give rise to a contravention of the law.

Equality Implications

None identified.

Public Access to Information

The Police and Crime Commissioner wishes to be as open and transparent as possible about the decisions he/she takes or are taken in his/her name. All decisions taken by the Commissioner will be subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

As a general principle, the Commissioner expects to be able to publish all decisions taken and all matters taken into account and all advice received when reaching the decision. Part 1 of this Notice will detail all information which the Commissioner will disclose into the public domain. The decision and information in Part 1 will be made available on the NYPCC web site within 2 working days of approval.

Only where material is properly classified as restricted under the GPMS or if that material falls within the description at 2(2) of The Elected Local Policing Bodies (Specified Information) Order 2011 will the Commissioner not disclose decisions and/or information provided to enable that decision to be made. In these instances, Part 2 of the Form will be used to detail those matters considered to be restricted. Information in Part 2 will not be published.

Is there a Part 2 to this Notice – YES

If Yes, what is the reason for restriction – Appendices B, C, D and E contain the financial information relating to this proposal. Indicative costs are provided where known, but a number of the items may require procurement competitions to be run in the future so the information contained needs to be treated as Commercial in Confidence, and therefore cannot be released as part of the public elements of this decision paper.

Tick to confirm statement √
Director/Chief Officer has reviewed the request and is satisfied that it is correct and consistent with the NYPCC’s plans and priorities.	C/Supt Sue Day – 1629 31.10.13
Legal Advice Legal advice has been sought on this proposal and is considered not to expose the PCC to risk of legal challenge.	Jane Wintermeyer 003840 31.10.13
Financial Advice The CC CFO has both been consulted on this proposal, for which budgetary provision already exists or is to be made in accordance with Part 1 or Part 2 of this Notice	Jane Palmer 004364 16.08.13
Equalities Advice An assessment has been made of the equality impact of this proposal. Either there is considered to be minimal impact or the impact is outlined in Part1 or Part2 of this Notice.	Supt 199 Phil Cain 26th Oct 13
I confirm that all the above advice has been sought and received and I am satisfied that this is an appropriate request to be submitted for a decision P.M.Cain Date 28.10.2013

Appendix A

CSAS Powers

Power to issue fixed penalty notices:

1. for truancy
2. in respect of an excluded pupil in a public place
3. for cycling on a footpath
4. for dog fouling
5. for graffiti and fly-posting
6. for littering
7. in respect of offences under dog control orders
8. Power to require giving of name and address
9. Power to deal with begging
10. Power to require name and address for anti-social behaviour
11. Power to require name and address for road traffic offences
12. Power to require persons drinking in designated places to surrender alcohol
13. Power to require persons aged under 18 to surrender alcohol
14. Power to seize tobacco from a person aged under 18
15. Power to remove abandoned vehicles
16. Power to stop vehicles for testing
17. Power to stop cycles
18. Power to control traffic for purposes other than escorting a load of exceptional dimensions
19. Power to direct traffic for the purposes of escorting abnormal loads
20. Power to photograph persons away from a police station.
21. Power to issue Penalty Notices for Disorder under Chapter 1 Part 1 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act
22. Possession of cannabis etc
23. Sale of alcohol to children
24. Purchase of alcohol by or on behalf of children.
25. Delivery of alcohol to children or allowing such delivery.
26. Buying or attempting to buy alcohol for consumption on licensed premises etc by a child
27. Breach of fireworks curfew
28. Possession of a category 4 firework
29. Possession by a person under 18 of an adult firework.
30. Supply of excessively loud fireworks
31. Wasting police time, giving false report
32. Using public electronic communications network in order to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety
33. Knowingly giving false alarm of fire
34. Causing harassment, alarm or distress
35. Throwing fireworks
36. Supply of adult fireworks without a licence
37. Failure to state/maintain required information when supplying adult fireworks
38. Failure to comply with requirements regarding import of fireworks
39. Consumption of alcohol by children or allowing such consumption
40. Sale of alcohol to a person who is drunk
41. Trespassing on a railway
42. Throwing stones at a train or other things on railways
43. Drinking in a designated public area

Appendices B, C, D and E

Appendices B, C, D and E contain the financial information relating to this proposal. Indicative costs are provided where known, but a number of the items may require procurement competitions to be run in the future so the information contained needs to be treated as Commercial in Confidence, and therefore cannot be released as part of the public elements of this decision paper.

Appendix F

Proposed CSAS powers that would be given to Council Employees (NEOs) in order to support the enforcement of ASB activities and the ASB Hub:

1. Parking offences
2. Abandoned vehicles *
3. Cycling on the footpath *
4. Power to deal with begging *
5. Causing harassment alarm & distress *
6. Knowingly giving false alarm of fire
7. Drinking in a designated public area *
8. Fly Tipping
9. Fly Posting
10. Graffiti*
11. Littering *
12. Dog Fouling
13. Powers to seize tobacco & alcohol from young people *
14. Traffic management, including stopping vehicles for testing and traffic control.
15. Noise Complaints
16. ASB in parks and open spaces *
17. Fireworks offences *

Appendix G

Proposed powers that could be given to PCSOs in order to support the enforcement of ASB activities and the ASB Hub:-

1. Dog Fouling
2. Littering
3. S46 EPA – Domestic waste presentation. Notice is served and non compliance can result in a FPN – £80
4. S47 EPA – Commercial Waste presentation/storage. (As above) – £100
5. S93 EPA – Street Litter Notice served and non compliance can result in FPN – £100 (usually used on businesses such as takeaways or clubs with flyers etc that produce a lot of their own litter)
6. S94a EPA – Can be issued on failure to comply with a Litter Clearance Notice – £100 (usually served on business premises that look a mess)
7. S34(5) EPA – Issued on failure to comply with Notice to produce waste transfer notes – £300
8. S5 COPA – Issued on failure to comply with Notice to produce waste carriers licence – £300
9. S43 ASB Act – serve a fixed penalty notice for fly posting (if witnessed, so we’ve never used it) £75

Appendix H

Communications Plan

Introduction

The proposed Anti-social Behaviour (ASB) hub is a joint initiative between City of York Council and North Yorkshire Police.

The aim of the hub is to ensure a more efficient, timely and appropriate response to ASB within our communities. It is proposed the hub will be a single team of frontline enforcement officers from both organisations, whose sole purpose will be to proactively tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB) across the City of York.

The proposed ASB Hub will see the introduction of Community Safety Accreditation Scheme (CSAS) Enforcement Officers CSAS provides the Chief Constable with the ability to grant specific policing powers to 3rd party organisations (in this case City of York Council). There are 43 powers available to the CC but these would be selected in terms of their relevance to York. Those receiving the CSAS powers will initially be Enforcement Officers from within City of York Council and will work directly with the three SNA’s across York.

This does not mean less frontline enforcement officers patrolling the city.

Aims & Objectives

1. To ensure partners and other key stakeholders are kept fully informed of progress
2. To ensure those officers and staff within both NYP and COYC are engaged with and receive regular progress updates from line managers
3. To ensure the wider organisations are aware of and support these proposals going forward
4. To ensure members of the public understand the rationale and benefits of the proposed ABS Hub in York
5. To raise awareness and understanding of the hub amongst all stakeholders

Stakeholders

Key Messages

Internal

The combining of resources and use of CSAS powers will enable both NYP and COYC to maximise available civil and criminal powers to deliver enhanced services.

External

Es to help communities be safe and
The proposed hub will deliver effective partnership working and enable NYP and
COYC to deal with ASB more effectively, enabling us to help communities be safe and feel safe.

Timetable of Communications

Date	Activity	Internal Communications	External Communications	Action Owner
October 2013	Initial engagement with staff	Face to face briefing to be given to those potentially affected officers and staff	If asked statement prepared	NB & RG
October 2013	Initial engagement with Stakeholders	N/A	Discussions with Key stakeholders	PC & SW
25 October 2013	Official COYC paper to be published	N/A	If asked statement ONLY to be given if any queries received	PC & SW
28 October 2013	Joint PCC/NYP, CoYC statement announcing hub	N/A	Statement to be made public	PC & SW
December 2013	NYP Decision Making Notice to NYP Exec Board	N/A	N/A	PC & PH & SB
December 2013	Decision Making Notice published on PCC website	Any key decisions to be communicated via an updated briefing to officers and staff potentially affected, NYP Front Counter staff across the organisation and FCR Staff	Updated If asked statement ONLY to be given if any queries received	PC & SW with support to update briefing from NB & RG
January 2014	Inform key stakeholders of significant progress on plans	N/A	Meeting held by DCC, PCC, Chief Exec of COYC etc	Project Team and PAs to senior officers
January 2014	Inform media of plans	Organisation wide comms informing staff of approved plans with approximate timescales for delivery Launch of NYP Intranet Subsite as a one stop shop for all the info and comms to date	Media Conference with DCC, PCC, Chief Exec of COYC etc	NB & RG , Project Team and PA’s to Senior Officers
February 2014	Preparation for launch; HR and training activity to commence	See departmental plans	N/A	RS, CG
March 2014	Design Marketing collateral inc. logo	Ensure agreement and buy in from key stakeholders	N/A	NB, RG and MR
April 2014	Recruitment and Training	See departmental plans	N/A	RS, CG
May 2014	Launch of York ASB Hub	Message of the Day (NYP),COYC Organisation wide comms, aides memiore, briefing packs for York staff	Media Releases and interviews, social media, leaflets to York Residents, posters, open day at the hub, dedicated internet pages	NB, RG, MR, TS
June 2014	One Month on…..update of stats and positive results and feedback	Message of the Day/In The Loop (NYP) COYC Organisation wide comms	Media releases and interviews, social media	NB, RG, MR, TS
October 2014	Six Months on…… update of stats and positive results and feedback	Message of the Day/In The Loop (NYP) COYC Organisation wide comm	Media releases and interviews, social media	NB, RG, MR, TS