If you missed this first evening Board of Supervisors' Meeting, you missed a good time. The meeting was much more relaxed and after the meeting, everyone stayed around to talk with elected officials and fellow Tunicans. Hopefully. this is only the beginning of moving forward in Tunica County.
Now, onto the complaints. That is why you are reading this blog isn't it?
1. On 9 Feb 2012, I sent an email to James Dunn, Sonny Nickson, Clifton Johnson and Andy Dulaney requesting this Committee be put on the agenda to discuss Housing and to present some of the documentation we have been working on for the past many months.
2. On 14 Feb 2012, Clifton Johnson sent an email stating this Committee was being placed on the BOS's agenda for 5 Mar 2012. This is not acceptable as the first meeting of the month is held at 9a and is full of departmental reports.
3. On 15 Feb 2012, I sent an email message to Clifton Johnson asking who made this decision. Still waiting for an answer on that one. However, I could probably make an educated guess.
4. On 15 Feb 2012, I called James Dunn to talk about this situation. James suggested the 29th of Feb @ 5p and I agreed.
5. On 15 Feb 2012, we arrived at the BOS's Meeting and found that this Committee was not the only group not given time to speak with the Board. There were Tunicans from the Verner Road area who had asked to talk about their flooding problems. This group too was not put on the schedule. They are on the BOS's agenda for the 29th of Feb at 5p as well.
So, back to the "who done it" with this scheduling problem. Oh, and one more thing, the Beat 2 Supervisor, Cedric Burnett was the only Supervisor who left and did not stay to talk with his constituents. I will venture to say he was out the door before the Recess was called.
By-the-way, both Tunicans who asked to speak with the BOS last night are residents of Beat 2. Again, I would like to thank the Beat 2 residents who voted for this Supervisor and those of you who did not bother to vote for sticking us all with this "not interested" Supervisor for the next four years. And therein lies my educated guess.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Sunday, February 12, 2012
The facts...just the facts
Okay so on the front page of the 10 Feb 2012 issue of the Tunica Times there is an article about our new Tax Assessor/Collector, Norma Anderson.
Within this article there is a quote by Anderson that reads: "It was important to know how everything worked and what all went into the job. But it was also to keep my fellow workers in their jobs - and for me to keep my job."
Now turn to page 4 of the same issue of the Tunica Times. Here you will find a letter to the editor from Tunicans for Transparency in Government. Within this letter is found the fact that one of your "fellow workers" is no longer employed in the Tax Assessor/Collectors office.
Ms. Anderson, when I spoke with you on 1 Feb 2012, you told me you terminated the white "fellow worker" the day you were sworn into office. You were sworn into office on 29 Dec 2011. Ms. Anderson, your statement in the 10 Feb 2012 issue of the Tunica Times is not true.
Within this article there is a quote by Anderson that reads: "It was important to know how everything worked and what all went into the job. But it was also to keep my fellow workers in their jobs - and for me to keep my job."
Now turn to page 4 of the same issue of the Tunica Times. Here you will find a letter to the editor from Tunicans for Transparency in Government. Within this letter is found the fact that one of your "fellow workers" is no longer employed in the Tax Assessor/Collectors office.
Ms. Anderson, when I spoke with you on 1 Feb 2012, you told me you terminated the white "fellow worker" the day you were sworn into office. You were sworn into office on 29 Dec 2011. Ms. Anderson, your statement in the 10 Feb 2012 issue of the Tunica Times is not true.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
8 Feb 2012 Board of Education Meeting
The following is a note I sent to my representative on the School Board after last night's meeting.
"Thanks for the opportunity to speak to the Board of Education tonight...although in attempting to say I could see a vast improvement since the last time I attended a meeting...I got away from my written remarks.
I did not find it very helpful for Marilyn to spend time lecturing about how the board works. I know she is upset about the newspaper article but I was there to speak to you all about the letter we received. The effort I made to speak to you all would need to have a Board that is ready to listen.
Larry Braziel's remarks were totally out of line. I spoke with him before you all went into Executive Session and he said he was not talking about me.
Additionally, I will not be spending any additional time in setting up a meeting with the Superintendent. I found his facial expressions when Board members voted against his requests disturbing. What I am going to do is to turn this request from the Board back to the person who wrote the letter of complaint.
This is all very unfortunate. I really thought I saw lots of improvement in the Board meetings. The remarks from Marilyn Young, Larry Braziel and B. S. Chandler have proven to me that this Board is not interested in listening."
End of note.
Let's start by saying this is the same type of treatment the Transparency Committee received from the Board of Supervisors in 2008 when we asked for clarity as they conducted their meetings. Then Board President, Billy Pegram, told us the Board was being "transparent" and four years later we are still digging to find information.
Next, Ms. Young, when citizens come to Board of Education meetings to speak with you, please listen. This is not a time for you vent your personal frustration about what is on your mind. It is a time to listen whether you agree or not.
Mr. Braziel, the word argument does not mean the same thing as the word fight. An argument is one side or the other of a debate. I might be wrong about this so look it up.
Mr. Chandler, first be aware that I am not a citizen who believes a Superintendent should be elected. I believe we need to interview and hire the best person we can afford to hire. Our children are too important to do otherwise. That being said, I found your body language toward the Board of Education to be less then desirable. We elected our representatives and when they vote you down on a certain subject, accept it. Don't sit there shaking your head. It gives the impression you think you are the smartest person in the room.
My representative, Tomaka Cotton, voted against your proposal on the Mississippi Teachers Appraisal and I happen to think she did the right thing for the right reasons. Your timing is wrong for changing this policy when a State mandated policy will be in place this summer.
"Thanks for the opportunity to speak to the Board of Education tonight...although in attempting to say I could see a vast improvement since the last time I attended a meeting...I got away from my written remarks.
I did not find it very helpful for Marilyn to spend time lecturing about how the board works. I know she is upset about the newspaper article but I was there to speak to you all about the letter we received. The effort I made to speak to you all would need to have a Board that is ready to listen.
Larry Braziel's remarks were totally out of line. I spoke with him before you all went into Executive Session and he said he was not talking about me.
Additionally, I will not be spending any additional time in setting up a meeting with the Superintendent. I found his facial expressions when Board members voted against his requests disturbing. What I am going to do is to turn this request from the Board back to the person who wrote the letter of complaint.
This is all very unfortunate. I really thought I saw lots of improvement in the Board meetings. The remarks from Marilyn Young, Larry Braziel and B. S. Chandler have proven to me that this Board is not interested in listening."
End of note.
Let's start by saying this is the same type of treatment the Transparency Committee received from the Board of Supervisors in 2008 when we asked for clarity as they conducted their meetings. Then Board President, Billy Pegram, told us the Board was being "transparent" and four years later we are still digging to find information.
Next, Ms. Young, when citizens come to Board of Education meetings to speak with you, please listen. This is not a time for you vent your personal frustration about what is on your mind. It is a time to listen whether you agree or not.
Mr. Braziel, the word argument does not mean the same thing as the word fight. An argument is one side or the other of a debate. I might be wrong about this so look it up.
Mr. Chandler, first be aware that I am not a citizen who believes a Superintendent should be elected. I believe we need to interview and hire the best person we can afford to hire. Our children are too important to do otherwise. That being said, I found your body language toward the Board of Education to be less then desirable. We elected our representatives and when they vote you down on a certain subject, accept it. Don't sit there shaking your head. It gives the impression you think you are the smartest person in the room.
My representative, Tomaka Cotton, voted against your proposal on the Mississippi Teachers Appraisal and I happen to think she did the right thing for the right reasons. Your timing is wrong for changing this policy when a State mandated policy will be in place this summer.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Tunica County Office of Planning and Development
On 5 Dec 2011, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing about the North Sub properties owned by John Ferguson and Commilla Johnson Perkins and leased by Ed Walls.
Also on 5 Dec 2011, Tunicans for Transparency in Government hand delivered a Freedom of Information letter to the Tunica County Planning Commission requesting “a copy of any and all correspondence, phone calls, pictures, directives and dates of conferences pertaining to the clean-up of Mr. Ed Walls’ property in the North Sub. We are looking for documentation the County is using in their pursuit of the ‘clean-up’ of the property listed in the legal notices in the Tunica Times.”
This request was honored and the Transparency Committee reviewed and discussed this matter at our meeting on 14 Jan 2012.
This is what we found:
1.This matter has been going on for quite some time.
2.There are inconsistencies within the correspondence.
a.Example: On 10 Jan 2008, a letter addressed to Mr. Walls states the following:
i.“Failing to comply Mr. Walls could and will require further action with an appearance before the Tunica County Board of Supervisors and subsequently a lien against your property.” Mr. Walls did not own this property on 10 Jan 2008 and to the best of our knowledge, Mr. Walls still does not own this property.
b.Example: On 22 Feb 2008, a letter addressed to Mr. Walls states the following:
i.Concerning a grocery store operated by Mr. Walls: “It is not zoned commercial as once thought. It is a residential area.” One would think the Code Enforcer would know this information before entering into conversations pertaining to a business that may be operating in a residential area.
c.Example: On 16 Jul 2008, a letter addressed to Mr. Walls states the following:
i.“You were given from February 22nd (2008) to April 30th (2008) to expedite and clear premises of all debris that would deface the property. I requested that Mr. Ferguson grant you that amount of time to get the premises looking nice and conducive for a respectable business operation, but you failed him, me and our office by not doing what was requested of you.” It appears the County had already discovered that the grocery store discussed in the 22 Feb 2008 letter was not permitted in this residential area. So, why is there still a discussion on 16 Jul 2008 about cleaning up a business in a residential area?
d.Example: In letters dated 21 Jan 2010 and 27 Oct 2011 to Mr. Walls it is stated that calls complaining about the Sears Grocery Store were received by the Tunica County Office of Planning and Development. And yet, no documentation of any calls was included with our Freedom of Information request. Absent this documentation, we would have to conclude there to be no back-up for these statements.
From the information we have been provided, our conclusion is that the clean-up of our County is not timely, effective, consistent and accurate. Our request from this study would be for the Planning and Development office to review their correspondence and efforts in order to implement improvements.
Also on 5 Dec 2011, Tunicans for Transparency in Government hand delivered a Freedom of Information letter to the Tunica County Planning Commission requesting “a copy of any and all correspondence, phone calls, pictures, directives and dates of conferences pertaining to the clean-up of Mr. Ed Walls’ property in the North Sub. We are looking for documentation the County is using in their pursuit of the ‘clean-up’ of the property listed in the legal notices in the Tunica Times.”
This request was honored and the Transparency Committee reviewed and discussed this matter at our meeting on 14 Jan 2012.
This is what we found:
1.This matter has been going on for quite some time.
2.There are inconsistencies within the correspondence.
a.Example: On 10 Jan 2008, a letter addressed to Mr. Walls states the following:
i.“Failing to comply Mr. Walls could and will require further action with an appearance before the Tunica County Board of Supervisors and subsequently a lien against your property.” Mr. Walls did not own this property on 10 Jan 2008 and to the best of our knowledge, Mr. Walls still does not own this property.
b.Example: On 22 Feb 2008, a letter addressed to Mr. Walls states the following:
i.Concerning a grocery store operated by Mr. Walls: “It is not zoned commercial as once thought. It is a residential area.” One would think the Code Enforcer would know this information before entering into conversations pertaining to a business that may be operating in a residential area.
c.Example: On 16 Jul 2008, a letter addressed to Mr. Walls states the following:
i.“You were given from February 22nd (2008) to April 30th (2008) to expedite and clear premises of all debris that would deface the property. I requested that Mr. Ferguson grant you that amount of time to get the premises looking nice and conducive for a respectable business operation, but you failed him, me and our office by not doing what was requested of you.” It appears the County had already discovered that the grocery store discussed in the 22 Feb 2008 letter was not permitted in this residential area. So, why is there still a discussion on 16 Jul 2008 about cleaning up a business in a residential area?
d.Example: In letters dated 21 Jan 2010 and 27 Oct 2011 to Mr. Walls it is stated that calls complaining about the Sears Grocery Store were received by the Tunica County Office of Planning and Development. And yet, no documentation of any calls was included with our Freedom of Information request. Absent this documentation, we would have to conclude there to be no back-up for these statements.
From the information we have been provided, our conclusion is that the clean-up of our County is not timely, effective, consistent and accurate. Our request from this study would be for the Planning and Development office to review their correspondence and efforts in order to implement improvements.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
6 Feb 2012 Board of Supervisors Meeting
Oh boy...the Board Room was really packed yesterday morning. Another reason to move the first meeting of the month to an evening time slot too. We could meet in the Court Room; even more people could come and everyone would have a seat.
Here are a few of the issues discussed during the meeting:
The BOS had a 9:45a appointment with T'rohosia Ingram and her attorney representing Daniels Farm Development, LLC. This is a housing community being developed in District 2 of Tunica County. Apparently, Ms. Ingram has been waiting for 2 years for the Tunica County Utilitry District to complete the Development's application for sewer and water. Why? Firstly, I don't understand why Ms. Ingram had to pay TCUD $15,500.00 for them to complete this application.
Supervisors McKinley Daley and Phillis Williams volunteered to investigate this delay and get the application completed within 30 days at the most. Thanks go out to these two Supervisors for taking the bull by the horns. We sure wouldn't have gotten this effort from the 2 Supervisors you replaced.
Another item: The Board of Supervisors moved to have Dr. Gene Osborne, who heads up the Healthcare Authority, to make a report at the first BOS meeting each month.
Again, thank you.
Another item: Supervisor Nickson moved and Supervisor Daley seconded a motion to increase the salary of a Road Department employee as requested by the Road Department Manager. Supervisor Burnett voiced his opionion to give everyone a $6,000.00 raise if this raise was going to be approved by the Board of Supervisors.
Geez, this is a prime example of doing things wrong so long you think they're right. Burnett doesn't seem to realize that employees need to be evaluated and raises given when warranted. Thanks again to Supervisors, Nickson, Daley and Williams who voted to give the department head the responsibility of running his or her department. That being said, I still don't think Joe Eddie Hawkins is the right person to be head of the Road Department.
Last item: Claims. Supervisor Burnett, please stay in the Board Room and review the claims just like the other Supervisors. You were out of the room when this part of the agenda was being conducted. You returned to the room to gather your things and leave at 11:48a. The claims were approved at 11:50a. And yet when I left the Courthouse at 12:16p, you were standing in the parking lot talking.
Excuse me, Cedric. We are paying you to do our business. Please do you job.
Here are a few of the issues discussed during the meeting:
The BOS had a 9:45a appointment with T'rohosia Ingram and her attorney representing Daniels Farm Development, LLC. This is a housing community being developed in District 2 of Tunica County. Apparently, Ms. Ingram has been waiting for 2 years for the Tunica County Utilitry District to complete the Development's application for sewer and water. Why? Firstly, I don't understand why Ms. Ingram had to pay TCUD $15,500.00 for them to complete this application.
Supervisors McKinley Daley and Phillis Williams volunteered to investigate this delay and get the application completed within 30 days at the most. Thanks go out to these two Supervisors for taking the bull by the horns. We sure wouldn't have gotten this effort from the 2 Supervisors you replaced.
Another item: The Board of Supervisors moved to have Dr. Gene Osborne, who heads up the Healthcare Authority, to make a report at the first BOS meeting each month.
Again, thank you.
Another item: Supervisor Nickson moved and Supervisor Daley seconded a motion to increase the salary of a Road Department employee as requested by the Road Department Manager. Supervisor Burnett voiced his opionion to give everyone a $6,000.00 raise if this raise was going to be approved by the Board of Supervisors.
Geez, this is a prime example of doing things wrong so long you think they're right. Burnett doesn't seem to realize that employees need to be evaluated and raises given when warranted. Thanks again to Supervisors, Nickson, Daley and Williams who voted to give the department head the responsibility of running his or her department. That being said, I still don't think Joe Eddie Hawkins is the right person to be head of the Road Department.
Last item: Claims. Supervisor Burnett, please stay in the Board Room and review the claims just like the other Supervisors. You were out of the room when this part of the agenda was being conducted. You returned to the room to gather your things and leave at 11:48a. The claims were approved at 11:50a. And yet when I left the Courthouse at 12:16p, you were standing in the parking lot talking.
Excuse me, Cedric. We are paying you to do our business. Please do you job.
For the record....
Before we move on to the Board of Supervisors’ Meeting on 6 Feb 2012, a story that ran in the 4 Mar 2011 issue of the Tunica Times, needs to be put to rest.
The story title is “Beat Two Supervisor files trespassing charges” and was written by Meg Coker. This entry on the Transparency blog has nothing to do with the reporter and every thing to do with the Supervisor.
The following is not a quote by Supervisor Burnett. It is a paraphrase of his statement to the reporter.
“Burnett said the incident was the last straw and felt that he must take legal action. He alleges that Tuchel and his wife, Barbara, have been on his property several times, where they have argued with his neighbors. He also stated that he believes that the Tuchels have been following him and also his wife for months.”
Not true. Barbara Tuchel has never been on your property Cedric. Never.
Not true: Bob Tuchel has never argued with your neighbors. Barbara Tuchel was talking with Lawyer Porter in the street on the side of the 1370 Beatline Road house. We were joined by an older lady who lives in the house that faces the side of the 1370 Beatline Road house. This lady was soon joined by a younger man. Both the lady and the younger man started arguing and yelling so Barbara Tuchel walked away. And that's the truth. Ask Lawyer.
Not true: Neither Bob Tuchel nor Barbara Tuchel has ever followed you or your wife. Period.
The following is a quote by Supervisor Burnett:
“All I want is for them to stay away from me, my family, my job and my property. I really don’t know what their motives are, but it’s sickening, it really is…”
Not true. And as far as your “job” is concerned, the Tuchels are your constituents and they have a right to know where you live. At a Board of Supervisors meeting in Aug 2009, Tunicans for Transparency in Government asked you if you lived at 1370 Beatline Road. You said: “No, I don’t live there.” We asked you to tell us where you lived and you told us: “Keep looking, you’ll find it.”
The next quote in the article is from Bob Tuchel:
“We (the Transparency Committee) have been looking into elected county officials not living in Tunica County. A viable candidate must live in the beat, county, or state depending on the office he is seeking. Otherwise it is a violation of Mississippi law. Having an address here seems to be enough for the election officials.”
This article ends with a quote from Burnett:
“Bullcrap! I’ve lived in Tunica since 1966.”
Now that is a classy statement from an elected official.
The story title is “Beat Two Supervisor files trespassing charges” and was written by Meg Coker. This entry on the Transparency blog has nothing to do with the reporter and every thing to do with the Supervisor.
The following is not a quote by Supervisor Burnett. It is a paraphrase of his statement to the reporter.
“Burnett said the incident was the last straw and felt that he must take legal action. He alleges that Tuchel and his wife, Barbara, have been on his property several times, where they have argued with his neighbors. He also stated that he believes that the Tuchels have been following him and also his wife for months.”
Not true. Barbara Tuchel has never been on your property Cedric. Never.
Not true: Bob Tuchel has never argued with your neighbors. Barbara Tuchel was talking with Lawyer Porter in the street on the side of the 1370 Beatline Road house. We were joined by an older lady who lives in the house that faces the side of the 1370 Beatline Road house. This lady was soon joined by a younger man. Both the lady and the younger man started arguing and yelling so Barbara Tuchel walked away. And that's the truth. Ask Lawyer.
Not true: Neither Bob Tuchel nor Barbara Tuchel has ever followed you or your wife. Period.
The following is a quote by Supervisor Burnett:
“All I want is for them to stay away from me, my family, my job and my property. I really don’t know what their motives are, but it’s sickening, it really is…”
Not true. And as far as your “job” is concerned, the Tuchels are your constituents and they have a right to know where you live. At a Board of Supervisors meeting in Aug 2009, Tunicans for Transparency in Government asked you if you lived at 1370 Beatline Road. You said: “No, I don’t live there.” We asked you to tell us where you lived and you told us: “Keep looking, you’ll find it.”
The next quote in the article is from Bob Tuchel:
“We (the Transparency Committee) have been looking into elected county officials not living in Tunica County. A viable candidate must live in the beat, county, or state depending on the office he is seeking. Otherwise it is a violation of Mississippi law. Having an address here seems to be enough for the election officials.”
This article ends with a quote from Burnett:
“Bullcrap! I’ve lived in Tunica since 1966.”
Now that is a classy statement from an elected official.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Reverse Discrimination is also WRONG!!!
At the Board of Supervisors' Meeting yesterday, the newly elected Tax Assessor had the County Administrator present the hiring of a new employee.
Today, I went to the Tax Assessors' office and found just what I was afraid of finding. The white employee that I thought might be "missing" was infact well....no longer with the County. Maybe the new Tax Assessor missed our blog on this website dated 14 Aug 2011 and the letter to the Editor on the same subject. The blog and the article had to do with the cost to the county of willy-nilly replacing employees without a care given to how much this type of behavior costs our county.
Well, I talked with the Tax Assessor today and was told by Ms. Anderson that she let the white employee go the very day she was sworn into office. And the reason? For the employee's own protection. Apparently, Ms. Anderson thinks someone would hurt the white employee. This just doesn't make sense to me.
At the time of my conversation with Ms. Anderson, I didn't think I had seen this job advertised in the Tunica Times. Ms. Anderson told me she did place an advertisement in the Tunica Times. So, I went back and checked my copy of the newspaper and found a mark by the ad placed by me. (I do this alot to remind myself that I had read the article, ad, etc.)
What I must have been thinking at the time was that Ms. Anderson was hiring someone to replace her as she was now the Tax Assessor. On that basis, guess I didn't think much about it at the time. By the way, the ad ran only one time on 13 Jan 2012 with a closing date of 25 Jan 2012. Not a real sincere effort but hey no one is asking me.
Ms. Anderson, just because you can do something does not mean it is the right thing to do. Reverse discrimination is wrong too.
Today, I went to the Tax Assessors' office and found just what I was afraid of finding. The white employee that I thought might be "missing" was infact well....no longer with the County. Maybe the new Tax Assessor missed our blog on this website dated 14 Aug 2011 and the letter to the Editor on the same subject. The blog and the article had to do with the cost to the county of willy-nilly replacing employees without a care given to how much this type of behavior costs our county.
Well, I talked with the Tax Assessor today and was told by Ms. Anderson that she let the white employee go the very day she was sworn into office. And the reason? For the employee's own protection. Apparently, Ms. Anderson thinks someone would hurt the white employee. This just doesn't make sense to me.
At the time of my conversation with Ms. Anderson, I didn't think I had seen this job advertised in the Tunica Times. Ms. Anderson told me she did place an advertisement in the Tunica Times. So, I went back and checked my copy of the newspaper and found a mark by the ad placed by me. (I do this alot to remind myself that I had read the article, ad, etc.)
What I must have been thinking at the time was that Ms. Anderson was hiring someone to replace her as she was now the Tax Assessor. On that basis, guess I didn't think much about it at the time. By the way, the ad ran only one time on 13 Jan 2012 with a closing date of 25 Jan 2012. Not a real sincere effort but hey no one is asking me.
Ms. Anderson, just because you can do something does not mean it is the right thing to do. Reverse discrimination is wrong too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)