Extending the Covenants

This topic contains 6 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  ICANGELS 1 year, 5 months ago.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #19969

    T. R. Alfonso
    Keymaster

    The current DCC&POA board of directors is planning to attempt to extend the Master Covenants without a vote of those effected by the extension, which is required by the covenants themselves. Read the legal opinion (paid for by members’ dues) here.Your comments are welcome

    • This topic was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by  T. R. Alfonso.
    • This topic was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by  T. R. Alfonso.
    #19977

    Peggy Dutton
    Participant

    The “vast majority” want to ensure that the board can go on extracting whatever dues they please from the membership to build whatever’s on their private little agendas? I don’t think. Test this bizarre theory out. Hold a vote.

    #19982

    Louis Fuchs
    Participant

    Will a judge or the MS Legislature nullify the voting requirements of covenants that thousands of people have been agreeing to when they purchased property in Diamondhead for the last 50 years?? Neither a judge nor the Legislature should tamper with the voting requirements of the covenants until after the POA Board attempts to use them. Until they fail, it’s all conjecture.

    Considering the corruption that currently exists on the POA Board, it may be better if the covenants do expire and the amenities sold.

    The City fathers, of course, would love to get their hands on that golf course. They could underwrite its losses through increased City taxes, similar to what the POA Directors are doing with the members’ dues. Council members and their cronies could get preferential tee times and deals on meals at the CC.

    The situation in Diamondhead is continually dragging property values down. The situation will eventually affect even the thousands of member/homeowners who are blissfully living in a universe that they believe is immune to the concerns of mortal men.

    Whether the City can incorporate the covenants into City Ordinances has already been answered at the City Council meetings and the answer is NO.

    This is an unfortunate situation and it doesn’t seem to have any satisfactory solutions.

    #19984

    tdragger
    Participant

    Tho Property OWNERS Association is the “owner” of the amenities in Diamondhead. That means exactly that, that the amenities are owned by the PEOPLE of Diamondhead. IT DOES NOT MEAN YOU OWN ANYTHING, it means that ownership of the amenities are attached to your property. If you sell, your “rights” to the amenities pass on to the next owner. You get nothing.
    There has been one core action that has been going on since the forebearerss of the Purcell Corporation founded Diamondhead. All amenities were set up in such a way as to give the IMPRESSION that the property owners were getting a great deal and a nice living situation, (we were), but behind that veneer, things were set up to strongly benefit the Purcell Corp. Let’s be very open. No business does ANYTHING without first making certain that their own self-interests are protected FIRST.
    The Purcell atmosphere is still prevalent in the current administration of the POA. It is the POA, not the people of Diamondhead that are “important”. It is the special interests within the administration that are protecting their own special interests. That is so obvious when a very few amenities run up deficits IN THE MILLIONS every year, justified by the special interest groups saying “That i only fair!” Where in the world is it fair that 70-80% of the population MUST support facilities that THEY DO NOT USE, to this extent?
    All amenities are desireable, whether we individually use them or not. They add to our community appeal, increase our property value, and are useful to the people who do use them. Reasonable assessments for each one are exactly that, reasonable. Facilities that consistently run deficits in The the millions ARE NOT JUSTIFIABLE. And those facilities need their management altered so that those deficits are brought under control. The special interests on the POA Board of Directors will hate that concept. It says they do not have the right to have THEIR amenities supported grossly excessively by all the rest of the community.
    SO WHAT? Get rid of the lingering Purcell atmosphere, that “Good Ol Boy” Southern Gestapo attitude, and force our POA to return to being the Property OWNERS Association. Not the purview of a very few who consider it their own private kingdom. Who currently run it like it is.
    We have a city now. We need to grow into being exactly that. Not the lingering vestiges of the Purcell Corp. And Purcell needs to start paying dues on their properties in Diamondhead, the same that all the rest of us do.

    #19985

    tdragger
    Participant

    The amenities of Diamondhead are wonderful, better than any city that I have ever lived in, and I have lived all over the world. I chose Diamondhead in retirement, and we do not regret that decision.
    However, there is no such thing as a perfect place, and the major holdback to Diamondhead’s achieving that state is that there is one amenity that siphons off an extraordinary portion of the amenity pie. To the tune of a MILLOIN-DOLLAR deficit every year. The Country Club and the golf courses. That is not acceptable.
    Amenities cost money. Few of them generate the amount of money that they cost, and the obvious result is that the city as a whole pays for their extra costs. That is the way that things run, in any city. Without any cost-negative amenities, there would not be any reason for any property taxes! However, when an area has one amenity that is considerably oversize for its city, and it consumes such a tremendous operating deficit, plus it is driven by a very small group that has always considered it their private fiefdom that all the rest of us are EXPECTED to support without question.
    That can’t continue. We are a city now. No longer the development that the Purcell Corp. developed as their private business. They did a good job, tho one that DICTATED what was to be, and the one thing that everyone knows is that any business sets things up for THEIR BENEFIT. The amenities are what sells the business, and as long as people are happy with the amenities, they will overlook some of the abuses. But the BUSINESS is in the business to make money, and to have things the way THEY want them. The Diamondhead Water And Sewer District was the most blatant of those abuses. Fortunately our new city has defacto taken over that miserable excuse of a Mafia operation. A hundred million dollars of abuse later.
    Diamondhead has evolved beyond that point, and we need to move on. Thank you, Purcell, now get out of our way. And start paying your property dues the same as all the rest of us.
    The POA, as set up, has not kept up with that evolvement. It is still run by the vestiges and the individuals that want to keep the old POA running, running as their private privilege kingdom, supported to a MILLION-DOLLAR A YEAR deficit support. Those facilities are grossly excessive to any realistic standard, and their deficits must be brought under control. Deficit support, yes, but not to the tune that they have run every single year that they have been in existence.
    And my last point is that it is the Property OWNERS Association, not the Property Administrators Association. It is OUR association, It belongs to US, and all the employees of the POA are EXACTLY THAT, EMPLOYEES, not rulers. It is time that the Kingdom of the Administrators returns to being EMPLOYEES, and the acknowledgement that WE are the EMPLOYERS. The people who pay the bills, the BOSSES.

    #19987

    ICANGELS
    Participant

    I think we all know the POA can not (extend the covenants beyond their expiration dates) by simply voting to incorporate them into the Bylaws. This is why they are seeking the court’s approval for their actions or, trying to come up with a plan B.

    As far as Purcell goes, I heard most of that property was repossessed by People’s Bank for failure to pay loans made against it. As I understand it, People’s Bank was attempting to avoid paying the dues on this large amount of property, per the original Agreement with Purcell. Not sure how that turned out.

    Correct me if I’m wrong here…

    #19988

    ICANGELS
    Participant

    The same could be said of Washington… :/

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.