November 20, 2014 at 7:59 pm #8996
For those who weren’t able to make the POA meeting tonight, it was an hour and and half waste of time. Our jsdues will remaiin the same, the board couldn’t even agree to lower it down to $60.00 a month.November 21, 2014 at 10:53 am #8995
A waste of time and effort? I suppose so but then again maybe we learned something about the true nature of this organization and why the current tried solutions will never succeed.
Last night we saw the true POA with all it’s ugly attributes. I was unfortunate to sit right behind a group of three one of which is a fairly well known golfer primarily because he has tried his best to maintain a position of authority. He and his two friends behaved like juvenile girls making snide remarks about anyone who said anything. A real obnoxious snit.
Then there were quite a few others who would go up front to make some inane comment and then return to their seats winking at each other like we were still in grammar school.
Someone should have requested that we get a show of hands of who were in favor of a dues reduction and those who were not. I could not tell because the golfers were making the most out of the situation.
I did get the impression that most of those on the board felt like this was entirely their decision and the opinion of the membership would be heard only in a cursory way. I perceived something approaching animosity from the board members. I was offended when a young woman board member made a castigating comment to the membership complaining that many people pay more in cell phone cost than dues. In fact in my own case it was not the money itself but the uneven way in which it is distributed. And even more annoying is the emergence of a group who consider themselves in an elitist sort of way and somehow justify that their activities deserved priority.
So what did we learn from all this?
We learned that going through the election process to fix this is just wishful thinking.
Some who run for office desire status so much that they will lie to get elected.
The only real way to get out from under the yoke of this organization is to either bring about it’s demise or change the ground rules in such a way as to make it transform into a different type of type organization.
I find it hard to believe that when one group exercises so much control over another group that there are not some legal pathways to remedy the situation. It would obviously take a lot of effort, a lot of money, and a lot of expert legal help to pull it off. At present none of these facilities are readily availableNovember 21, 2014 at 12:24 pm #8997
I’m sure we could get some of them and previous directors thrown in jail if there we’re an independent in depth audit going back at least 15 years. From reading posts I know there are several members of this discussion community dnol that know where the bodies are buried, who was holding the smokng gun and who made money illegally at our expense. I am sure these posters could give examples of the poa directors past and present breaking poa rules or bylaws. We could use this information to legally go after the thugs that have always run the poa. But the people who know all the dirty little financial secrets have made it clear that they like having that eletie group in control of us. They’re likely golfers who snicker because they know we’re paying for their cheap rounds on the links. I’m sure they even know that golf will always lose a fortune as the game declines in popularity. What you said about the directors and their cliques acting like hateful smug juveniles is something I’ve always felt. That group is like an insane geriatric high school complete with a duplicitious lady who thinks she’s the prom queen and the golfers who think they’re the football stars. It’s hard to believe this is even a city. But Diamondhead is a city now and we have too many layers of people controlling us and enjoying our hard earned money.November 21, 2014 at 12:32 pm #8998
PANTS or PANTIES ON FIRE???
POA BOARD MEETING, Nov. 20, 2014: Board members vote on reducing dues:
On the motion by VP J. Weber to reduce dues to $50 per month, only three Board members voted “YES” (J. Fletcher, J. Weber, M. Schaefer).
Eight voted “NO” (U. Seitz, P. Montjoy, S. McCulley, D. Silcio, C. Harvey, K. Johnson, and M. Kyger, plus D. Crosby, who voted by phone.) Here are some of their excuses or comments against reducing dues to $50/month:
1. “$50 is too aggressive…”
2. “$50 is MUCH too aggressive…”
3. “I NEVER agreed to cut ANYTHING in dues…” (But you DID say “Cut the Budget” at the DCA candidate Forum.)
4. “…Talked to a couple of y’all…$50 is too aggressive…”
5. “I ran on efficiencies and transparencies…$50 is reckless and irresponsible…”
6. “I can’t support $50…$65 is NOT a bad deal…some people have higher cell phone bills…”
7. “$50 is irresponsible…We need to complete the 5-year golf course plan…now people are coming to join our golf club…” (HOW MANY??)
8. (By phone) “I’m opposed.”
Four of the above also voted against setting the 2015 Budget spending level equal to a $60 per month dues rate AND against actually lowering dues to $60 per month. (They voted against a measly $5 per month cut.) These four were: C. Harvey (new 4-yr. term), K. Johnson (term up in 2 years), M. Kyger (ex-officio term) and D. Crosby (term up in 2 years).
The other 7 voted to set the POA budget at an amount based on $60 per month dues. This passed because only a majority is needed to set spending levels. However, although these 7 voted for cutting dues by $5 to $60 per month, 8 votes are needed to change dues levels, so the dues remain at $65 per month.November 21, 2014 at 12:58 pm #8999
Actually I like Silcio comment the best. He said it was just too confusing and he was not sure if he understood it.November 21, 2014 at 1:28 pm #9001
rohboat – 2014-11-21 1:58 PM Actually I like Silcio comment the best. He said it was just too confusing and he was not sure if he understood it.
hehehe Having to think and understand things is hard on the neurons. Silcio shouldn’t be allowed a vote if he’s that confused.
With the expensive poa legal team of advisors (we pay for) ya know there’s someone around who could school him or clue him in about what he’s voting on.November 21, 2014 at 3:53 pm #9002
Best comment from a Member:
Only 14 Members asked questions last night. (Not counting the guys spouting off in the back of the room.)
To me, the best comment was from a Member who cited the sacred “TAKEOVER AGREEMENT” and pointed out that a part of that agreement includes a statement about “SUFFICIENT dues to MAINTAIN” the amenities “ACCEPTABLE TO THE MEMBERSHIP.” (That means US.) This astute Member then asked the Board:
“WHAT has been done to DETERMINE what is acceptable to the Membership?”
The next Member to comment said that “THE ELECTION determined WHAT Members want….”
In the Election, we the Members kicked out the Incumbents and elected 8 new Board members, but only three seem inclined to do what they said. Some other new Board members “coat-tailed” in and are now trying to weasel out of what they supposedly stood for by trying to deny their earlier promises to cut dues, or to “CUT THE BUDGET”. (One can PERHAPS excuse the Kyger-endorsees for their actions to some extent since THEY never really wanted to “cut dues.” However, one of them bragged about how he ran the POA on $30 per month in his Diamondhead News “bio”. Also, remember that 2 Kyger-endorsees for Officer positions who lost by big margins actually stated “LOWER DUES” or “REDUCE DUES” in their paid, full color campaign ads in the Diamondhead Advertiser.)November 22, 2014 at 12:34 pm #9004
I do not think there can be any doubt that the 6:00 pm time is preferable with most folks especially the older residents who make up the majority in this community. There is a significant contingent who are hell bound to argue that this is a youthful community with their futures depending on this area expanding commercially.
Despite condescending comments from members of the board the most annoying activity was that generated by a golfer who went on with a litany smirky remarks directed at anyone who does not accept his position of leader of the pact. He sat down next to two old poops who obviously imitated his obnoxious behavior. Then as several other attendees went to the front to make goofy comments they would pass back to their seats nodding and winking to the smart ass to show that they were members of the pact.
This scene gives a good picture of what the good old boy support group looks like.November 22, 2014 at 2:43 pm #9007
I’m with you on the 6 pm meeting time rohooat but not for the same rationale. I’m one of the contingent who knows this city will need to attract a tax base or only the independently wealthy among us will be able to live here. The price to maintain certain amenities will rise to the point where the middle-class will have to sell their property at a loss. .To me myself it’s now a stretch to call the city the poa forced down our throats "a community". Still there is no turning back form what the poa did with their secret unethical and expensive push for incorporation. btw As of last census the median age in this city is 48. Younger families moving here and slowly attracting more good businesses is the only realistic hope at sustaining this city long-term. Just my two bits.November 22, 2014 at 3:16 pm #9008
. I think the most vicious insults and comments exposing the self-interest and greed from the *build it and they will come* side can be found in the many emails circulated amongst them to promote their propaganda. Several add a comment as the email circulates. btw Get over yourself Dick Park. Unlike your email statement I’m sure John Fletchers knows what actually passed. He is not stupid. You have a lot of balls insinuating that Fletcher will do whatever he wishes. Your group has gotten your way on everything. We’re just the working slobs paying your bills Dick. The people side of truth and fairness always win in time. To all on that email list your days of living off of others are numbered. Get a life buy a brain and pay for your own golf you creeps.November 22, 2014 at 6:42 pm #9009
Were two of the old Poops sitting near him the old “Ancien Regime” hangovers from the original self-appointed City Council?
Those 2 ole boys are usually there sniffing around the loud-mouthed loser.November 23, 2014 at 12:24 pm #9011
I did not know those two old cooks who were sucking up to Mr. Big shot. His honor was displaying expressions which clearly showed that he had some dissatisfaction with the proceedings. Others who were kissing his ring were clearly showing their limited perception of the serious problems in diamondhead.
I think it would have helped tremendously if sometime during the comments period someone had requested a show of hands of who adamantly fit into one camp or the other. The good old boys support group picked up the slack and the board evidently felt the heat.
I can’t imagine what it would be like to play golf with this arrogant group. I was an avid golfer before Katrina in New Orleans and I throughly enjoyed playing with a wide variety of people. But New Orleans is a metropolitan city so you were never burdened with trivial issues by petty individuals. For a few years after Katrina I drove to New Orleans to play on the resurrected North Course. It was my understanding that golfers pretty much covered the cost of course maintenance but honestly I never did see the books.November 23, 2014 at 12:45 pm #9012
King K waltzed into our wine club meeting just after the vote smug as ever. Amazing how one guy can have such control of our future. So many in the wine club seemed to believe everything he said about the budget, the vote and the reason they can’t cut dues.November 23, 2014 at 2:46 pm #9013
Mark – I think we are basically on the same page facing most of the same problems in Diamondhead.. However a few differences.
FIRST It’s the age thing. The latest census shows a medium age of 48 .(not mean or mode.)
The data when viewed as a normal distribution is heavily skewed towards the low end. As a consequence I find the median is a poor representation of the overall appearance of the data. I find this statistic misleading. The mode figure clearly shows the bulk of the population centers around the sixties decade.
This is more closely illustrated if you observe the people when you drive around the area. This would have been especially apparent if you looked closely at the attendees at the last POA open meeting fiasco. They represent that mode you can see in the bar chart distribution.
SECOND It’s about increasing the tax base. Truth is I don’t give a hoot about the tax base. As long as the streets are passable and the grass is not too tall I am cool. Most of us old geezers need groceries, pharmacies and gas for the car. So the 64 dollar question is why do we need all this commercialization for products we don’t need.
THIRD and end of BS .The rise in cost of amenities is a serious problem and needs to be solved if we are ever going to the feel contented living in this place. The secret to accomplish this is to pry the golf operation away from the POA. I think the city group would be thrilled to gain big city status by bringing in a casino. In the same transaction maybe a little arm twisting on the POA would get them to give it up.
Silly idea? Maybe so but Maybe thinking out the box will save us from this quagmire and the evil Mr. KNovember 23, 2014 at 2:59 pm #9014
Five questions that need to be asked AND ANSWERED to end the âBuild it and they will comeâ lunacy.
1. Who are âtheyâ?
2. Where are âtheyâ coming from?
3. When can we expect a return on the investment?
4. Where is the unbiased market study to justify the expenditures? You know like a prospectus?
5. Who would invest in a company with a 10 year track record of losses and no clear plan to break even?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.