MY DESERT PRINCESS BLOG
  • Blog
  • Subscribe
  • Blog
  • Subscribe
Search by typing & pressing enter

YOUR CART

10/25/2021 12 Comments

The Peter Webb recall Ballots Are in the mail

The Peter Webb recall ballots are in the mail.  Some homeowners have already received their ballots.

This recall is an opportunity for every homeowner to make their feelings known.
We elect our board members to represent all homeowners , be respectful and communicate openly,  make informed business decisions and control our expenses.   All votes matter.

Peter Webb has promised to resign immediately if he is successfully recalled.  If this happens, his open board position will be filled at the annual election.  If the recall fails,  Peter Webb will continue to be a board member until his term is up in 2023. 
. 
​
Please exercise your right to vote and send in your ballot.

The blog would like to know have you cast your ballot yet?



  
12 Comments
Ken Muraco
10/26/2021 06:42:09 am

I voted to REMOVE HIM. I’ve witnessed his lack of respect personally toward his fellow homeowners during meetings and his lack of professionalism. If we can’t work together than he doesn’t belong in a position of direction. We don’t need a tyrant, we need a compassionate and friendly representative of our homeowners who actually lives here full time.
Let him go and let’s have a replacement who works WITH us and not AGAINST us for the well-being of our exclusive community. Not sure we can trust some of the other board members who seem to quietly follow his direction and in doing so reflect the same disturbing actions.

Reply
Violations are Abundant
10/26/2021 07:18:42 am

I do not agree with Peter Webb's statement about being in compliance with topics discussed during executive sessions. I have reviewed a handful of Exec Session meeting minutes against CA Civil Code 4935 and there appear to be MANY violations.

Reply
Judith Stephan
10/26/2021 09:20:22 am

The only permissible discussions in executive session per CA Civil Code Section 4935 (Davis-Stirling)

(a) The board may adjourn to, or meet solely in, executive session to consider litigation, matters relating to the formation of contracts with third parties, member discipline, personnel matters, or to meet with a member, upon the member’s request, regarding the member’s payment of assessments…

So, yes, there are numerous violations of this and other provisions of Davis-Stirling. It is completely unacceptable for a board to act in violation of the laws governing HOA's and to deliberately withhold information from the homeowners.

We must see minutes for all discussions that were illegally concealed from the membership by being in executive session. The so-called "Strategic Plan" and the discussion of the recall come immediately to mind.


Unless we get this HOA going in the right direction with BOTH a board that knows and acts on its responsibilities and a membership that is actively involved in the operation of Desert Princess, we will continue in the wrong direction. Fellow homeowners, we have recourse. We can request resolution of these issues and the board has to meet with us to resolve them. Let's get going.

Reply
DC
10/28/2021 08:05:50 pm

Another violation of the law that which this BOD exposed the members to is the new "rental rules" that starkly violates California Civil Code section 4740, and potentially exposes the community to over $250K liability

Anyone that has owned property at the Desert Princess prior to the new "rental rules" should demand a refund of their rental fee. The rental fee represents a restriction on the proprietary rights, and it is expressly prohibited by Civil Code section 4740. Furthermore, Civil Code section 4741 exposes the HOA to a civil fine of up to $1000.00 of having a rule that restricts rentals in a CID. Failure to comply with Section 4741 may result in a HOA being liable for actual damages (e.g., lost rental income) and a civil penalty of up to one thousand dollars ($1,000). All these issues have been adjudicated in Brown vs. Montage at Mission Hills, and the DPCC HOA acted negligently since it knew or should have known that the new "rental rules" violate the law and may result in a liability of possibly more than $250K

Reply
Judge
10/26/2021 10:32:52 am

Lynn C. On our board has blocked all emails. Has anyone else noticed?

Reply
Judge
10/26/2021 10:38:52 am

Actions speak louder than words.

Reply
Terry
10/26/2021 01:18:28 pm

I am appalled by the lack of honesty coming from leadership of the BOD. The relocation of the women's tee box happened before our eyes and Peter Webb misspoke about even being aware that this was taking place. He knew that he could not float an explanation that would fly so he simply invented a fiction that he and the board were unaware of this construction project. He also put forth a ridiculous dollar figure for the cost, namely $1900. Magically he knew what it cost but was not aware of the project.

Review of past executive sessions by a knowledgeable homeowner reveals many violations of subject matter prohibited under Davis Stirling Act.

BOD President unable to recall objectional comments made to homeowners and even fellow BOD members is another example of dishonesty. He cannot recall these comments because he knows his comments were improper.

It seems likely that the board president played a hand in the illegal removal of "door hangers" that were legally placed at homeowners property. His threat of charging an innocent homeowner with trespassing reveals his ignorance of trespassing laws and Davis-Stirling which clearly states that the distribution of the door hangers were proper and lawful.

People have disagreements over opinions which is of course completely understandable. Dishonesty is not excusable and especially from someone in a leadership position. I would like to see DP on the road to financial stability and an honest dialog with those elected to provide leadership. For that reason I will vote to recall Peter Webb.

Reply
Anonymous
10/27/2021 06:29:06 am

Sadly Terry, the most recent email postcard sent to support Mr. Webb, continues to misrepresent and diminish the owners who joined forces to initiate the recall. To describe this as an ANONYMOUS cabal of owners is simply untrue. A recall of this kind requires the petitioners to identify themselves by name, address and signatures all of which are verified by the HOA before the recall can proceed. So sorry that it doesn't require accompanying photos like the Peter Webb testimonials, but it is what it is......hardly anonymous.

Reply
Takis P Vartelas
10/26/2021 10:58:16 pm

I did receive the ballot today and I will send it in in a couple of week. I did vote to recall Peter Webb but I do not know how our vote will be protected especially when our names and addresses are on top left of the envelope and many of us have voiced our opinions recalling Peter. Where the ballots go and who keeps them secure and who do we trust that they were received? Anyone knows?

Reply
Michelle
10/27/2021 06:00:07 am

Takis, don't wait to send in your ballot. The recall is administered by an independent, professional, third party corporation. All ballots mailed in go to them, in this case, The Inspectors of Election. They will also moderate the actual meeting on December 6th and will receive any ballots cast on that day. Hope this put your fears to rest about the integrity of this process.

Reply
Autumn
11/11/2021 11:28:12 pm

I just read an email that was sent by Hank Kras that was sent to what appears to be the entire Desert Princess homeowners distribution list, and besides the fact he is no longer on the board and is blatantly abusing his access to a confidential list, I am pretty shocked to see him promote and defend his pet project involving an expenditure of over $5 million for landscaping.

To quote him: “At this point we estimate the cost of the total project will be $5.2 Million. If approved by homeowners, this would result in a temporary surcharge of up to $33 per month to HOA dues for a period that will be estimated at 15 years (depending on final terms from banking institution). We anticipate this cost would be offset to some extent, perhaps as much as $10, by savings in water use, current plant replacement costs, and landscape labor maintenance.”

We just faced a $45 per month increase in HOA fees and I understand that some homeowners that live here full-time were able to realize a monthly reduction in spectrum fees, but that is not the case for all homeowners here.

This kind of tone deaf nonsense involving a substantial increase of $33 a month for a “temporary surcharge” (for 15 years ?!) makes zero sense financially unless it is truly a need not a want from a former board member who appears to be the “king of the castle” here.

Reply
Craig Robinson
11/18/2021 04:05:22 pm

Here is the problem with that comment. Our CC&R's require that the physical layout of all flora be pursuant to the original plan. About 7 or 8 years ago during the drought, the appropriate government agencies ordered the reduction of water use. At an annual meeting shortly thereafter, the Board told the members that it was impossible to follow the CC&R's with respect to the trees, bushes, etc. because of the mandate by the government. The Board asked for a vote of those present at the annual meeting and received the homeowners consent and understanding. This was informal and in no way changes the Boards obligation under the CC&R's. The water shortage is what created the desert landscape on the golf course and around the condos. The Board also indicated that it needed a new landscape plan primarily because of the water issue and the aging of our plant life. The Board undertook the study and under the direction of Hank Kras, the plan is finally nearing completion. It took 5 years to get a complete plan with Covid-19 adding two of those years. This will not go into effect without a change in the CC&Rs. As a result a vote of Homeowners, not just the Board, is necessary to implement the plan. Whether you vote for it or not, and none of us have seen it, so who knows, is your prerogative. I think it will come down to paying additional costs, fines, and violation of government agency rules for water or paying for a new landscape plan. Also, consider that everyone who has put in desert landscape may have to have it pulled out because it violates our CC&Rs if the modification to the CC&Rs fail.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Charter

    This blog is designed as a means to provide transparency and informative access to the policies and protocols of the Desert Princess Palm Springs Homeowners Association, the governance of the HOA Board of Directors and the management of the community’s assets by The Management Trust. The expressed intent is to establish a neighborhood hub for trusted connections and the exchange of helpful information, goods, and services; it is hoped that homeowners will use it to build a stronger and safer Desert Princess Palm Springs.

    This Blog will not publish any comments that are personal attacks or unrelated to the published post.

    ​

    PLEDGE

    BE HELPFUL
    Share this space in a constructive way. Be kind, not judgmental, in your conversations

    BE RESPECTFUL
    Remember you are speaking to your real neighbors. Strong communities are built on strong relationships

    DO NOT DISCRIMINATE
    Racism, hateful or foul language, or discrimination of any kind will not be tolerated.
    ​

    NO HARMFUL ACTIVITY
    ​
    Any activity that could hurt someone—from scams to physical harm—are off limits.

    Archives

    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    August 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.