September 6, 2007 at 5:48 am #2232
Any commments or questions concerning the recent push by the Diamondhead Country Club and Property Owners Association’s board of directors push for the municipal incorporation of Diamondhead are welcome here.September 7, 2007 at 7:12 pm #2231
Would like to see a side by side comparison list of cost, presently and after incorporation. Showing every thing, facility maintenance, equipment maintenance and acquisition, roads, grounds maintenance, security, water and sewer, management positions, salaried positions, hourly positions, (an organization chart would suffice), POA fees, legal cost, Taxes(estimated), in short all that it takes to have a city, so that one can try and judge if every thing needed has been covered and a lot of moneys is not being paid for someone’s opinion provided in “a study” and nothing really substantial covered in what is needed to be covered in establishing a city and how much it will cost.September 7, 2007 at 7:29 pm #2233
A post script to the #987 thread I submitted earlier, I would expect that at some time the residents would vote on what we will do as to incorporation. I would expect to see a choice between several proposals or designs for incorporation along with the choice not to incorporate. I would hate to see a “take it or leave it” agenda. Instead of having only one citizens committee to develop a proposal possibly 2 or 3 committees would be advantageous to allow conflicting viewpoints a place to seek refuge. Then, at the vote the majority choice would prevail. (No one ever said it was easy) Hope all this is not too democratic for some. The light of public scrutiny will illuminate the darkest corner, be not afraid.September 8, 2007 at 1:18 am #2234
Someone at the POA told me when I called that nothing would change if incorporated. I asked about the water/sewer and was told it would stay the same. We will still pay dues and dues will go up as needed. I feel that there is more to this story than we have been told.September 8, 2007 at 6:35 am #2235
Is that not the problem? After Katrina nothing was made clearer than Diamondhead needed a major change. We wound up with an unarmed security force, no water, no electricity, no communication to the outside and an absent “mayor without portfolio”. The main concern of the POA was not the welfare of the community, over seven hundred homes were lost, but how fast they could get the golf courses operational. I know, I was there.September 8, 2007 at 7:50 pm #2236
It sounds like no one attended the recent town hall meetings that were held during the first three weeks of August to get an understanding of what incorporation would mean to the Diamondhead residents. They were very informative and the questions presented were answered with positive answers for the need to incorporate. In addition, the recent Diamondhead News (September issue) explained in detail what the city government would offer to the residents once incorporated. The big picture is not necessarily what this will do for Diamondhead now but for the future when the covenants run out in the year 2020. It would be very beneficial to have a city government in place when the POA goes away if the POA does not get 85% of the residents to vote continuance of the the covenants, which I feel is very doubtful. It is hard to get 85% of the Diamondhead residents to vote on anything. Just look at the number of votes during the POA elections.September 8, 2007 at 8:09 pm #2237
I agree 100%!! I attended the second meeting and learned a lot. Our future is NOW! We must take control of our own destiny, before it is too late. Burglary was rare in Diamondhead when I first moved here in August of 2003. Now it is common. I have been a victim myself. Living at the Northern edge of Diamondhead, within a stone’s throw of Kapalama, someone stole my pressure washer that had been used only once. A sheriff deputy came to my home last week to inform me that there were several burglaries and that they were 12-14 year olds who lived near my home!! Where are these kids parents? We must get a police force that can make arrests and the only way we can get it is to become a city. I do not believe the Attorney-General’s opinion in 2003 will hold up our incorporation and the development of a police force. There are other places in MS where police have been ruled eligible to make arrest on private property.September 8, 2007 at 8:58 pm #2240
I was wondering if any one has actually read the covenants. They have nothing to do with any of the benefits that incorporation would bring to the community. They mainly deal with the type of structures that can be built and where such structures can be placed in Diamondhead. Their expiration is hardly a good reason to impose another government without getting rid of the ineffective original. They can be read here:
Many people did attend those town meetings and many left with unanswered questions. That is the reason we have rejuvenated this forum and solicited everyone’s input. Please urge the organizers for the drive to incorporate to participate in this open discussion. That way they can answer any questions any and in turn can be questioned and re questioned. And their responses will be recorded. They call it a level playing field.September 8, 2007 at 9:09 pm #2241
The AG was not writing about arrests. He was writing about the enforcement of traffic laws on private roads. The Hancock County Sheriff’s Office did respond to your call when you reported the burglary and they could have arrested someone if they had evidence. The POA board’s plan would not put a cop on every street corner. It would simply give us another police force who could only do the same thing HCSO deputies did in your burglary.
What the proponents of the POA Board’s plan are not telling you is that if the roads in Diamondhead remain private we will miss out on funding for the repair and maintenance from other governmental sources. Simply put, there is no good reason to keep the road of Diamondhead private under municipal incorporation.September 9, 2007 at 12:41 pm #2244
I have never trusted the POA. They have never given me a reason to.
Why would anyone want to keep the roads private?
Mr.Alfosno, I am glad you are back and your web site is up and running. Great job.September 9, 2007 at 1:56 pm #2245
golf carts are not legal to operate on public streets is why they are wanted to remain private.September 9, 2007 at 3:12 pm #2246
That’s priceless!September 9, 2007 at 3:38 pm #2247
I don’t understand why the POA will be needed if Diamondhead does indeed become a city. Sounds like double taxation to me.September 9, 2007 at 5:30 pm #2248
I think you are right, and it is one of the variables that need to be a choice in any vote to incorporate. You could probably keep things as they are but you could also have a separate country club much as it is every where else in the country or world for that matter. Even the yacht club falls into this category. the boat piers, tennis courts, walking tracks swimming pools etc. would come under the cities recreation dept, as they are everywhere else.September 9, 2007 at 6:34 pm #2249
I get the impression you are not for incorporation. If so, what do you suggest we do to have some control over what is going on here. The POA has lost all control over roads, enforcement of any kind of security, to stop the illegal acts of speeding, loud music, riding of 4-wheelers down the “private roads” of Diamondhead and golf carts down streets that are no where near the Golf courses! I have witnessed an incident where children were riding a golf cart and were in a sharp curve on our street. A car had to swerve around into the other lane to prevent hitting them. If something is not done, someone is going to be killed and then will their survivors sue the POA for not preventing this? Another problem is that contractors are working on building houses 7 days a week and sometimes late into the night. I know this is against the POA building covenants.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.