“Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education”
Questions for Candidates
Palos Verdes Residents for Responsible Government (PVrrg) believes that an informed electorate is the key to effective democracy. An important election is coming up on January 14, 2020 in Palos Verdes Estates and Miraleste. All five Board of Directors Seats for the Palos Verdes Homes Association are being contested. Six candidates have collected at least 100 signatures of PVHA members, including three incumbents. Because the 50% +1 quorum requirement has not been met since 2009, PVHA has not had a valid election since 2009. Thus all current members of the Board have been appointed by the Board, and never elected. This election is important because for the first time ever there will be a ballot initiative to lower the 50% quorum in the By-Laws to 35%. PVrrg is supportive of this ballot initiative in order to allow PVHA to act as a democracy; however, PVrrg takes no position on supporting individual candidates.
PVrrg has posed a series of questions for each of the six candidates, and their responses are contained in the links below. The questions are based on issues of interest to PVHA members in our community. We hope this is helpful to you. The League of Women’s Voters is considering a Candidate Forum at which time you could hear directly from each candidates live and in-person — more details to follow. If there is a Forum, afterwards PVrrg will post those questions on this page, with links to the video of each candidate’s response to those questions.
Governance
1. Mission: How would you describe the PVHA purpose and obligations pertaining to the CC&Rs and PVHA Bylaws written in the 1920s and the Deed Restrictions written in the late 1930s?
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
2. Quorum: Do you support having the quorum lowered to less than the current 50%, and if so, how low? Please explain.
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
3. By-Laws Update: Should the PVHA seek homeowners’ approval to update the By-Laws, and if so, what sort of changes would you advocate?
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
4. Communications: What changes would you advocate to improve communications between the Board and the homeowners?
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
Process Changes
5. View Disputes: What is your position on the role of the PVHA in facilitating resolution on view disputes? If you had been on the Board in April 2019, would you have supported that change to the View Policy? Please Explain.
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
6. Art Jury: What are your perspectives on the Art Jury approval process, and what changes, if any would you like to see made?
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
7. Election Process: What changes, if any would you advocate for improving the PVHA Director Election process?
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
8. Digitizing records: What are your thoughts on digitizing all records currently kept on paper by PVHA?
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
Parklands & CC&Rs
9. Parkland Sale: If you had been on the Board in May 2012 when the decision was made to enter into an MOU to sell 1.7 acres of Parkland to a private resident who had built on it extensively, would you have voted to approve? Please explain.
For responses by the six candidates, click here.
10. Parkland Appeal: If you had been on the Board in November 2015 when a decision was made to appeal the Superior Court ruling against PVHA’s sale of parkland, would you have voted to approve? Please explain.
For responses by the six candidates, click here.