November 12, 2013 at 3:58 pm #6130
The ongoing controversy of weather or not a casino should be built in this area has
reached a new junction point. Most residents if they are paying attention, should realize
that the POA has contracted a political lobbying group to create a slanted opinion poll
of just what the attitudes of the people here are with respect to the desirability of having a casino in close proximity
Even a cursory inspection of their report shows a contrived document which displays very little similarity to a scientific survey. The immediate question is just how much did this cost in order for the residents to be misled?
It is obvious that the POA very much wants to have a casino constructed here in the area. Their motivation leaves considerable room for speculation. It is obvious that the role of the POA has changed considerably since the emergence of city status. Their role as meaningful support to city operation is probably going to completely evaporate sooner or later. At that time it seems likely that its authority to require all residents to be members and pay dues is going to be contested by seasoned attorneys. Creating a casino existing within the purview of the amenities would ensure longevity.
To their credit the POA is beginning to incorporate an atmosphere of community spirit which might possibility enliven interaction between residents and support for their activities. One
of their problems is that they are attempting to support a world class golf course for a bunch
of retired duffers. The non users feel like they are supporting an overly expensive facility.
At a personal level because activities within both the city administration and the POA lack transparency and additionally because of a lack of community involvement it is difficult to form an enlightened position with respect to the casino.November 13, 2013 at 3:02 pm #6129
“Jacobs Entertainment, Inc. has requested …a Resolution …from the Diamondhead Property Owners Association, Inc. Board of Directors…”
What previous “Resolutions” has the POA BOARD provided to OTHER specific private corporations? Is there a list somewhere?November 14, 2013 at 1:11 pm #6133
Seams the POA and city are getting ever so close to being in bed together to the detriment of the citizens. Kyger’s assertion, in the resolution, is that the city has already approved the building of the casino. That couldn’t be further from the truth. The city recently disapproved a change in zoning on the south side for a casino, requested by Jacob’s entertainment. Go to the POA meeting tonight, Nov 14th at 6pm to voice your disapproval.November 29, 2013 at 1:30 pm #6138
A “CASINO SUPPORT” RESOLUTION has popped up on the City Council Agenda for
Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2013, 6pm.
Resolution Supporting Casino Development within Diamondhead: p. 81-83.
FULL AGENDA: (83 page packet)
http://www.diamondhead.ms.gov/Agenda%20%20Minutes/12.3.13%20-%20FINAL%20as%20of%2011.27.13%20at%2010pm%20CST.pdfJanuary 8, 2014 at 3:31 pm #6230
It seems most of the resident participation in the Diamond Head news forum happens in the thread dues for nothing. While this is a major contention that residents have with the powers that be, it only addresses part of the overall dissatisfaction with what is going on in Diamondhead. This involves all the people who have found a way into authority position. Of course this includes the city council and anyone who has been appointed by either the POA or the city administration .To look at the dues for nothing topic without considering the total financial impact being placed on Diamondhead residents fails to open the door for comprehensive interrogation.
I am very disappointed that there are so few people using the Diamondhead News facility to let their voices be heard. I can only speculate the reason for this. Could it be that I grossly miscalculated and by and large most residents don’t give a hoot what is going on. They figure they do not have the power to change anything so why bother.
By the way the Diamondhead taxpayers association is having their next meeting on Saturday Jan 11 at the libraryJanuary 8, 2014 at 3:42 pm #6231
The diamondhead taxpayers assoc meeting on Saturday has the potential to be very interesting.
The group of people attending the last meeting seem to be quite cognizant of the dynamics of local politics and in truth more savvy about politics in general than me. . The main topic that they seem to be concerned about is the purchase of the church.
Recently the mayor had a statement about the state of the city placed in the sea coast echo. He admitted that there was an uproar in the community about the purchase. However he went on to say that ultimately the city council will decide if it will be purchased. I really think this statement gives a very strong hint that this council fully believes that they control the future of this community irrespective of resident views. While the council will allow people to make a statement at council meetings the way they are received shows a lack of respect for views of the populace.
It would be very encouraging if a substantial number of residents would use this facility to give their opinion about this. Attending that meeting would be a good place to startJanuary 8, 2014 at 3:45 pm #6232
The article written by Tommy Shafer and displayed in the Sea Coast Echo had several statements. Evidently the mayor and the council are quite concerned about the interchange on I10 at Diamondhead . He claims to have had a very productive meeting with MDOT about changes to that intersection. His very next statement says that last month the city council passed a resolution pledging it’s support for a casino project.
Now in the past Mr. Shafer is on record as saying that it would be up to the populace to make that decision. I think that this topic needs to be well vetted before the city council is allowed to run rough shod over the residents.January 8, 2014 at 3:49 pm #6233
I think we can all breathe a sigh of relief that the creation of a police force has been tabled for some time to come. Except for a few authority obsessive people this will be well received.
The POA has essentially adopted a gestapo style authority and while they do an excellent job of portraying themselves as a community concerned organization their behind the scenes adventures says otherwise. They made a recent statement emphasizing that they do not practice nepotism. Well almost. That is unless the leader allows the rule to be broken.
Would anyone like to guess who is going to be the club manager after the 90 day interim period is over. I am sure an exception will be necessary in order to get a very competent person.
In all fairness the POA does an incredible job of maintaining the pleasant layout of the community. The problem is that eventually authority needs to be passed on to the city and for this to occur in an orderly manner the populace need to be involved and the POA authority challenged.January 9, 2014 at 8:41 am #6234
You have good insight. In the Agenda packet for the Jan. 7 Council Meeting, the City’s Property Insurance Renewal Proposal includes $2.3 million on “Building”(p. 16), no doubt meaning the DH Baptist Church.January 9, 2014 at 9:49 am #6235
DPOA “Open” Board Meeting Thursday, January 9, 2014; 4:30PM.
Diamondhead Country Club, Emerald Ballrooms 2&3.
The Agenda will explain to residents exactly what will be discussed: (HA!)
http://www.diamondheadms.org/Portals/0/pdfs/Agenda1-09-14.pdfJanuary 9, 2014 at 11:17 am #6236
Rohboat, Door Number 3?:
SPECIAL CALL MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL
Council Chambers, City Hall, Jan. 11, 2014; 10:00 a.m.
1. Discussion regarding State support for Diamondhead Economic Development projects.February 7, 2014 at 4:46 pm #6254
Recently I saw a statement from the POA that they were Jake with the development with a casino in Diamondhead.
Then a short while ago a resident who seems to be very much up on local political manners informed me that this was not entirely true because they changed their mind.
Could this be true? Is the POA really the circus that it sometimes appears to be?
And then the follow up is the mayor then says that we have a problem in Diamondhead with transportation chocking our business growth.
The interchange on I10 needs to be fixed to take care of this problem.
Am I missing something here or is there a connection between these two?February 7, 2014 at 5:02 pm #6255
Then there is the looming question..Just who is the manager of the clubhouse?
I have been anxiously waiting for the trial period to be over so we can see if this organization can live up to it’s nepotism credentials.
And good lord what would be the impact on the general manager if his girl friend is denied a long term arrangement?
A well run organization needs to keep it’s activities close to the vest or how else can they keep snookering the populace?
The elderly population in Diamondhead has much to be thankful for. It is good mental exercise to play detective and try to figure out what is going on.February 9, 2014 at 4:11 pm #6256
Your Dues at Work? For Whom?
I hear the POA Board has an upcoming million dollar “retreat” at the Great Southern Club. It seems our POA “rulers” are planning a slate of candidates (headed by Sislow for President) and are busy organizing their campaign to remain in power.
HOW MUCH of our dues money is being spent on this “RETREAT”?February 16, 2014 at 1:11 pm #6280
Residents should read the Sunday editorial on the Sun Herald.
The situation in Diamondhead is rather pathetic.
There are two governing bodies both playing the same game with respect to transparency.
While the POA and the city administration are the primary decision makers in the community one also has to contend with the country club imagined elite as a factor because they seem to be cognizant of inner workings of the power structure.
I think their mode of operation is to have work sessions where decisions are made and the general meeting is just a formal meeting to authorize these decisions.
The dynamics of this situation is almost too complicated to state here. The real shame is that the residents do not participate in any discussions on the Diamondhead News internet facility. I can only assume that most are not interested.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.