Agenda item

A public question form is included on page 32.

This is an opportunity for public questions to be addressed to the chair.

Residents or persons working in the borough may ask questions on any matter in relation to which the council has powers or duties.

Responses may be supplied in writing following the meeting. Responses to public questions received at previous meetings are included in the agenda.

None were received at the last meeting.

The following public questions were submitted at the meeting:

Q1 from residents of Underhill Road

Residents of Underhill Road are concerned about speeding vehicles in Underhill Road and the danger these pose to us particularly local children. There are only two signs in the whole of Underhill Road to indicate that this is a 20mph zone.  Please could the community council support our campaign for more signs on Underhill Road?

Action: Question referred to the environment and leisure department and proposed walk about with local ward councillors, Councillors Hamvas, Edwards and Mills.

Q2 from Rye Village Residents Association

In light of the reported flaws relating to the design, budget and management of the Solomon’s Passage Project part financed by CGS, can the Chair of the Community Council please state the reasons why the Community Council took the decision with the Public Realm Manager to implement the Solomon’s Passage Project rather than simply noting "it needs to be implemented"?

Action: Question referred to the environment and leisure department.

Q3 from Rye Village Residents Association

Will the Chair of this Community Council and Chief Officer responsible for Environment & Leisure Services please let the Community Council know whether you agreed the current joint CGS/S106 Solomon’s Passage Project public realm variations and it's new budget from 2010 to the present date; if so please state how you reached this decision and state your reasons why, whom did you consult with over it, and on what date did you make this decision so it can be publicly scrutinised?

Action: Question referred to the environment and leisure department.

Q4 from Southwark Travellers Action Group

On Brideale Close, residents are unhappy that an old electrical outtake unit has not been removed. The unit poses health and safety risks and encroaches on one resident's home- blocking out natural light. Residents have also made complaints about broken letterboxes and badly done sleeping policemen?

Action: Question referred to the Southwark travellers’ officer, housing and community services department.

Q5 from Mick Barnard

On the 20 December 2012, I met with the Chief Executive, the Strategic Director of Finance & Corporate Services and Councillor Livingstone about a number of issues which date back to 3 years ago.  I was promised a response in relation to those issues could you please let me know when would I receive that response?

Action: Councillor Livingstone apologised to the questioner for the delay and explained a response on those issues would be sent to him soon.

Q6 from local residents

Is there any progress concerning cleaner greener safer funding that was awarded to the Wickway Court in regard to the flooding?

Action: Officers in environment and leisure to report back on all cleaner greener safer projects that had not yet been implemented in order to know what the issues are.

Q7 from local resident

Coaches free parking along Vauxhall Bridge Road – Councillor Hargrove agreed to speak to the questioner after the meeting to discuss the best way forward on this.

Q8 from local resident

TRA Halls utility bills: Each TRA were informed that any aspects of bills were covered by the council with the exception of electricity bills, please could you confirm that in future TRAs would be asked to pay their own electricity bills from April 2013.

Councillor Colley explained that the current arrangements were being reviewed.  Every TRA had a different lease, tenancy agreement or nothing at all.  Some TRAs paid their own utility bills and others did not.  The current situation had to be reviewed for this reason to ensure everyone was on a fair footing and it was needed for clarity as well.  She fully understood that it was not a fair situation for some TRAs.

In response to the question on TRAs Mick stated that the same matter arose a few years ago; he explained the estate in question did have a lease and therefore were not required to pay for their electricity bills.