Home › Forums › Diamondhead Country Club and Property Owners Assoc › POA Board of Directors › 2008 board meeting minutes
April 13, 2008 at 10:44 am #2514
Comment here on the monthly minutes of the board of directors of the Diamondhead Country Club and Property Owners Association, Inc,April 16, 2008 at 6:21 am #2513
Any idea what the “Ethics” proposal in the March Minuites consist of that was put off to the April meeting?May 1, 2008 at 12:22 pm #2518
Dosen’t appear that anyone in the know is interested in ethics??May 2, 2008 at 6:55 am #2519
Where can we read the minutes?May 2, 2008 at 7:00 am #2520
We have established a library of Diamondhead Country Club and Property Owners Association board of director meeting minutes here:June 8, 2008 at 4:57 pm #2532
It seems everyone has disappeared, even the candidates.
Does anyone want to share how they feel about proposition No. 1?June 8, 2008 at 4:58 pm #2531
Well, the conversations for ethics went nowhere. Thanks to all who did make a comment. All of you voters out there will have to put what ever weight you want to that topic. In the National politics and our State politics it is becomeing a topic of much interest with all the things that are popping up in those old pesky uncontrolled newspapers. Another topic, has any one talked to a candidate for any of the officies how they plan to eliminate our deficits in the budgets that seem to keep increaseing? You know there was a proposal to charge $5 bucks a round for golf and it was voted down by the board. Appears the closer we get to the election the quiter everything becomes, why is that. Mabey “Shultze” is alive and well.June 8, 2008 at 6:39 pm #2530
If anyone is interested, the Board voted down an Ethics proposal at the April Special meeting, 8 voted against the proposal, 2 for it and 1 abstension. I wounder why? The proposal that was defeated, the article in the June 2008 Diamondhead News , Vol. 25, No 6 stated, would be included in the minutes of the meeting. The reporter for the article offered no explanation for the defeat even though the article states lengthy discussion was conducted. I guess if there are no clearly defined rules you can’t violate any and your conceince will remain clear, like other figuers in history I leave to your imagination to identify. Remember the Guard Shultz in the TV sit com “Stalag 13” “I see knothingggg, I know knothinggg, I hear knothinggg. Today that is called plauseable deniability I think. Hopefully some clear explanation will come forth or possibly at a minumum our board will be covered by the new ethics laws of Mississippi or they will be adopted by our board at some point in the future.
Why is it so important to have defined ethics? Without defination the “schultz” concept allowes an observer to maintain noninvolvement, definition of the ethiocs makes an observer complicent in the act. Honest, concientious people do not want to be complicent they will however maintain a plauseable deniability.June 9, 2008 at 2:27 am #2533
What is the purpose of proposition #1 ?, any one know. As I read it, and that is probably wrong, we want to add a couple of directors to the board. Why?? Wouldent that make it harder to accomplish change. To get candidates in office to accomplish the desires of all the residents would take elections over several more years than it does now to get a majority of people in office that would vote to change the status quo. Less positions is more desireable, not more, and they should all be up for reelection at the same time, so there will be no hangerons when the members are tired of the way things are going.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.