Tonight, the Tunica County Sheriff had an appointment at the Board of Supervisors' Meeting at 5:05p. As soon as the meeting started and before he was called by the President of the Board, Sheriff Hamp left the Board of Supervisors' table and left the court room...slamming the door behind him.
Sheriff Hamp then re-entered the court room, placed his notebook on the podium and moved to stand infront of the Board of Supervisors. While one of the Supervisors was talking, our Sheriff interrupted the Supervisor who was speaking. The President of the Board told the Sheriff his appointment was at 5:05p and to please wait until he was called.
When the Sheriff was recognized he turned to the audience and started spouting all of this stuff that didn't make any sense and at least one accusation that was not true. The Sheriff intimated that we did not have insurance coverage at the present time. That is not true. Tunica County paid $66,972.79 to Cigna Healthcare in the claims dated 31 May 2012. Therefore, employees are and have been covered.
As a citizen of Tunica County I did not appreciate how the Sheriff behaved during this meeting. IMHO if the Sheriff or any officer loses his or her temper so quickly, he or she does not need to be carrying a gun.
After the meeting the Sheriff refused to talk with me. Apparently, Sheriff Hamp is not a fan of the criticism I have sent his way lately. Tough.
Tonight Sheriff Hamp made a big deal about the Tunica County Board of Supervisors not being the boss of him. Well, okay. Stop sitting at their table during Board of Supervisor Meetings.
I will say one positive thing to Sheriff Hamp. Thank you for not doing your "all rise" routine before the meeting.
Friday, June 29, 2012
Useful research
This is the report we delivered to the Board of Supervisors this evening. More about the meeting in the next post.
29 Jun 2012 Board of Supervisors' Meeting
Preface to report:
I. 15 Jun 2012 Board of Supervisors’ Meeting
a. There was a motion on the table with a second that was not dealt with by the President of the Board. Neither Bob nor I have a written record of the content of the motion and the parties involved. Mr. Dulaney did you make a note of this motion? Maybe there is a way to correct this action?
b. We have many questions surrounding the discussion of insurance for Tunica County Employees. Some of these questions are as follows:
i. Why didn’t the County Administrator give the Cigna proposal for the renewal of Tunica County’s medical insurance to all of our elected Supervisors?
ii. Was there the expectation that this policy would just roll over without the consent of the Board of Supervisors?
iii. Did the County Administrator think this expense was not going to be laid on the minutes of the Tunica County Board of Supervisors?
iv. Who is the insurance agent of record for the Cigna policy?
v. Who is getting the commission on this policy?
The answers to all of these questions pale in light of our investigation to find the truth in a statements made by Supervisor Cedric Burnett. We are referring to the statement that was said here in the Board of Supervisor’s Meeting and reported in the Tunica Times. Burnett is quoted as saying to Nick Floyd of Nick Floyd and Associates: “Humphreys County said going with you was the worst decision they ever made.”
We called Humphreys County to verify Burnett’s statement. The above statement is false and we have a letter from the Humphreys County Chancery Clerk stating this is not true. (A copy of the emailed letter is attached to this report.)
Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:18 AM
From: "Lawrence Browder" chanceryclerk1996@yahoo.com
To: "Tuchelsgal@bellsouth.net" Tuchelsgal@bellsouth.net
Dear Mrs. Tuchel,
Nick Floyd and Associates served Humphreys County Court House for the years of 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. During that time we were very pleased with the service they provided and the reason for discontinuing the insurance policy had nothing to do with the excellent service they provided.
Sincerely,
Humphreys Co. Chancery Clerk, Lawrence D. Browder
As you can imagine, this turn of events caused us to think about what else might not be true. In addition to Humphreys County, we contacted Jefferson County, Washington County, MS ICS, Indianola Community Action and Delta Mental Health Center. We found each of the entities we contacted to be very pleased with Nick Floyd and Associates and all were thrilled with the amount of money that was being returned to them through their various Bridge Plans.
All of this information is contained in this report so we won’t take up time talking about each conversation. We will be listing this information on our blog so that Tunica County Employees and other interested parties can look up the comments and make their own phone calls should they choose to do so.
Bob and I have no financial interest in Nick Floyd and Associates but we do have a huge interest in Tunica County. We still don’t understand why one of our Supervisors would use his position at the Table to trash a man’s business by uttering statements such as “Humphreys County said going with you was the worst decision they ever made.” Mr. Burnett you owe Nick Floyd an apology.
II. Humphreys County:
A. Chancery Clerk
1. Lawrence Browden: 601-247-1740; c: 601-836-7772
2. Secretary: Chervon
3. Sending letter via email
III. Jefferson County:
A. Comptroller:
1. Linda White: 601-786-3420
2. Policy in place for 5 years.
3. About 145 participants in government and about 250 participants in their nursing home facility
4. Very pleased, very happy
5. Seminar to explain benefits
6. Saved Jefferson County money
B. Supervisor:
1. Curtis Gray: 601-670-3516
2. L/M 26 Jun 2012
C. Supervisor:
1. Trent Hudson: 601-786-1726
2. NFA has returned about 1M to Jefferson County
3. Couldn't be happier.
4. Talked with Dunn at the coast
5. Dinner with Sonny and Rev
6. Phillis called Trent a couple of weeks ago.
IV. Washington County:
A. Washington County Health Center: Greenville
1. Terry Jones: 662-820-0142
2. 3 years with NFA
3. Blue Cross with the Bridge
4. About 200 participants
5. Plan is saving them money
6. Very happy with the plan
V. MS ICS:
A. Louise McClinton: 662-231-01117
1. 2 years with NFA
2. Blue Cross with Bridge
3. Started with 435 participants
4. Through word of mouth from participants ICS has moved to around 500 participants
5. Money has been returned to ICS
6. "Wonderful for our company"; very pleased.
VI. Indianola:
A. Community Action Committee
1. Executive Director: Louise Bradford: 662-207-0903
2. 102+ participants
3. Great experience for them
4. Asked for James Dunn’s phone number and indicated she would call him with a personal recommendation.
VII. Holly Springs:
A. Mayor's Office
1. Ms. McDonald: 662-252-4652
2. Ms. McDonald attending MML Conference; will return 2 Jul 2012
3. Spoke to Deputy City Clerk Maddie Richmon
a. Policy started in Feb 2012
b. About 100 people participating
VIII. Delta Mental Health Center of Washington County, MS
A. Nonie Davis: 662-334-2891 ext. 115
1. 3 years with NFA
2. 200+ participants
3. Very good and saving them money
29 Jun 2012 Board of Supervisors' Meeting
Preface to report:
I. 15 Jun 2012 Board of Supervisors’ Meeting
a. There was a motion on the table with a second that was not dealt with by the President of the Board. Neither Bob nor I have a written record of the content of the motion and the parties involved. Mr. Dulaney did you make a note of this motion? Maybe there is a way to correct this action?
b. We have many questions surrounding the discussion of insurance for Tunica County Employees. Some of these questions are as follows:
i. Why didn’t the County Administrator give the Cigna proposal for the renewal of Tunica County’s medical insurance to all of our elected Supervisors?
ii. Was there the expectation that this policy would just roll over without the consent of the Board of Supervisors?
iii. Did the County Administrator think this expense was not going to be laid on the minutes of the Tunica County Board of Supervisors?
iv. Who is the insurance agent of record for the Cigna policy?
v. Who is getting the commission on this policy?
The answers to all of these questions pale in light of our investigation to find the truth in a statements made by Supervisor Cedric Burnett. We are referring to the statement that was said here in the Board of Supervisor’s Meeting and reported in the Tunica Times. Burnett is quoted as saying to Nick Floyd of Nick Floyd and Associates: “Humphreys County said going with you was the worst decision they ever made.”
We called Humphreys County to verify Burnett’s statement. The above statement is false and we have a letter from the Humphreys County Chancery Clerk stating this is not true. (A copy of the emailed letter is attached to this report.)
Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:18 AM
From: "Lawrence Browder" chanceryclerk1996@yahoo.com
To: "Tuchelsgal@bellsouth.net" Tuchelsgal@bellsouth.net
Dear Mrs. Tuchel,
Nick Floyd and Associates served Humphreys County Court House for the years of 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. During that time we were very pleased with the service they provided and the reason for discontinuing the insurance policy had nothing to do with the excellent service they provided.
Sincerely,
Humphreys Co. Chancery Clerk, Lawrence D. Browder
As you can imagine, this turn of events caused us to think about what else might not be true. In addition to Humphreys County, we contacted Jefferson County, Washington County, MS ICS, Indianola Community Action and Delta Mental Health Center. We found each of the entities we contacted to be very pleased with Nick Floyd and Associates and all were thrilled with the amount of money that was being returned to them through their various Bridge Plans.
All of this information is contained in this report so we won’t take up time talking about each conversation. We will be listing this information on our blog so that Tunica County Employees and other interested parties can look up the comments and make their own phone calls should they choose to do so.
Bob and I have no financial interest in Nick Floyd and Associates but we do have a huge interest in Tunica County. We still don’t understand why one of our Supervisors would use his position at the Table to trash a man’s business by uttering statements such as “Humphreys County said going with you was the worst decision they ever made.” Mr. Burnett you owe Nick Floyd an apology.
II. Humphreys County:
A. Chancery Clerk
1. Lawrence Browden: 601-247-1740; c: 601-836-7772
2. Secretary: Chervon
3. Sending letter via email
III. Jefferson County:
A. Comptroller:
1. Linda White: 601-786-3420
2. Policy in place for 5 years.
3. About 145 participants in government and about 250 participants in their nursing home facility
4. Very pleased, very happy
5. Seminar to explain benefits
6. Saved Jefferson County money
B. Supervisor:
1. Curtis Gray: 601-670-3516
2. L/M 26 Jun 2012
C. Supervisor:
1. Trent Hudson: 601-786-1726
2. NFA has returned about 1M to Jefferson County
3. Couldn't be happier.
4. Talked with Dunn at the coast
5. Dinner with Sonny and Rev
6. Phillis called Trent a couple of weeks ago.
IV. Washington County:
A. Washington County Health Center: Greenville
1. Terry Jones: 662-820-0142
2. 3 years with NFA
3. Blue Cross with the Bridge
4. About 200 participants
5. Plan is saving them money
6. Very happy with the plan
V. MS ICS:
A. Louise McClinton: 662-231-01117
1. 2 years with NFA
2. Blue Cross with Bridge
3. Started with 435 participants
4. Through word of mouth from participants ICS has moved to around 500 participants
5. Money has been returned to ICS
6. "Wonderful for our company"; very pleased.
VI. Indianola:
A. Community Action Committee
1. Executive Director: Louise Bradford: 662-207-0903
2. 102+ participants
3. Great experience for them
4. Asked for James Dunn’s phone number and indicated she would call him with a personal recommendation.
VII. Holly Springs:
A. Mayor's Office
1. Ms. McDonald: 662-252-4652
2. Ms. McDonald attending MML Conference; will return 2 Jul 2012
3. Spoke to Deputy City Clerk Maddie Richmon
a. Policy started in Feb 2012
b. About 100 people participating
VIII. Delta Mental Health Center of Washington County, MS
A. Nonie Davis: 662-334-2891 ext. 115
1. 3 years with NFA
2. 200+ participants
3. Very good and saving them money
Monday, June 25, 2012
The Deductible
Following a reading of the policy material and the proposal to Tunica County authored by Nick Floyd & Associates, I have a solid understanding of their costs and specifically the deductible.
The discussion has centered on the deductible for the Humana PPO policy. There is a $5,000 deductible for that policy. The question causing so much disruption is who is paying for that deductible.
The Medical Bridge Advantage Program will lower the deductible for the employee to $500. The $4,500 difference in the deductible is covered by the Medical Bridge Advantage Program (MBAP). The County will pay one premium to Humana for Employee Benefit Services. The premium that is paid by the County for the MBAP, the $4500, is put into a reserve account that will be used to pay claims.
Each claim will be processed twice; once thru Humana and then again thru Electronic Billing Services (EBS). The employee will have Dental, Vision, Short Term Disability, Cancer and Accident Disability Coverage. Additionally, each employee will have $50,000 in life insurance with $5,000 for his or her spouse and $2,000 for each child. The employee would normally have to pay for these benefits themselves through their current cafeteria plan and would be charged according to their age. The benefits being offered by NFA have one set rate for all ages.
The Accident Disability and Cancer coverage would pay money directly to the employees and if the employee leaves their employment with Tunica County, they will have the option to keep these policies. The Accident Disability policy also covers the employee on or off the job and will pay in addition to any Workers’ Comp they may receive.
The matter to be considered is which plan, Cigna or Humana, provides the best coverage. I do not have the Cigna plan. It is my understanding that the County Administrator does have the Cigna proposal and has had this information since April. I can find no Insurance Agent of Record or I would have contacted the agent myself.
That being said, the material provided by Nick Floyd and Associates shows Humana having superior coverage at a lower or equal cost to the employee than does Cigna.
Now that the employee issues are settled, that leaves one question, “What is the cost to Tunica County? The Premium fees are not in my materials.
Disclaimer: I have no financial interest in Nick Floyd and Associates nor is my family covered through the group policy held by Tunica County for their employees.
What is still disturbing is all of the commotion about this issue and why wasn’t the Cigna proposal given to the Supervisors by the County Administrator.
Bob Tuchel
Tunicans for Transparency in Government
The discussion has centered on the deductible for the Humana PPO policy. There is a $5,000 deductible for that policy. The question causing so much disruption is who is paying for that deductible.
The Medical Bridge Advantage Program will lower the deductible for the employee to $500. The $4,500 difference in the deductible is covered by the Medical Bridge Advantage Program (MBAP). The County will pay one premium to Humana for Employee Benefit Services. The premium that is paid by the County for the MBAP, the $4500, is put into a reserve account that will be used to pay claims.
Each claim will be processed twice; once thru Humana and then again thru Electronic Billing Services (EBS). The employee will have Dental, Vision, Short Term Disability, Cancer and Accident Disability Coverage. Additionally, each employee will have $50,000 in life insurance with $5,000 for his or her spouse and $2,000 for each child. The employee would normally have to pay for these benefits themselves through their current cafeteria plan and would be charged according to their age. The benefits being offered by NFA have one set rate for all ages.
The Accident Disability and Cancer coverage would pay money directly to the employees and if the employee leaves their employment with Tunica County, they will have the option to keep these policies. The Accident Disability policy also covers the employee on or off the job and will pay in addition to any Workers’ Comp they may receive.
The matter to be considered is which plan, Cigna or Humana, provides the best coverage. I do not have the Cigna plan. It is my understanding that the County Administrator does have the Cigna proposal and has had this information since April. I can find no Insurance Agent of Record or I would have contacted the agent myself.
That being said, the material provided by Nick Floyd and Associates shows Humana having superior coverage at a lower or equal cost to the employee than does Cigna.
Now that the employee issues are settled, that leaves one question, “What is the cost to Tunica County? The Premium fees are not in my materials.
Disclaimer: I have no financial interest in Nick Floyd and Associates nor is my family covered through the group policy held by Tunica County for their employees.
What is still disturbing is all of the commotion about this issue and why wasn’t the Cigna proposal given to the Supervisors by the County Administrator.
Bob Tuchel
Tunicans for Transparency in Government
Sunday, June 17, 2012
“Something is rotten in Denmark”
This business with the County medical insurance is most disturbing. This is so crazy it is hard to know where to begin. This is some of what I’ve learned by attending the Board of Supervisors’ Meetings.
For the past 6 or 7 years Tunica County’s medical insurance has been carried by Cigna. The County’s policy runs from 1 Jun to 31 May of each year. Apparently, the County Administrator received an update from Cigna sometime in Apr 2012 but he did not share this information with the Board of Supervisors. What was he thinking?
During this period of time, another insurance company made a presentation at a Board of Supervisors’ meeting and if I understand this correctly, the new company offered more benefits to Tunica County employees at a reduced rate to the County.
Now, this is where it gets interesting. At the first Jun meeting of the Board of Supervisors, representatives of both insurance companies were present. What I found very upsetting was a statement made by the woman from Cigna. She told everyone present that 1.) She needed an answer today as to whether Tunica County was going to renew the contract with her company and 2.) Cigna was holding and not paying all claims submitted to them from providers of medical benefits to Tunica County employees. What? Excuse me but this policy is paid monthly by our government and the Jun premium has been paid. How dare you come into our County and threaten non-payment of medical claims when your company has been paid for this service.
At the above meeting, the Board of Supervisors decided to continue discussion of the County’s medical insurance until the 15 Jun 2012 meeting.
In between these two meetings, more then a few Tunica County employees were given information that was either false or misleading. Who did this and why would they do this? To me, the answer became obvious at the 15 Jun 2012 meeting.
At the 15 Jun 2012 Board of Supervisors’ meeting the room was packed. Was the attendance staged or did the attendees come of their own free will. Who knows?
What I saw was disgusting on the part of the Beat 2 Supervisor. This Supervisor can’t be bothered with other issues like paying the claims. Don’t take my word for it. Go read the Public Records and you will find “Absent” on the line that would have contained his signature had he cared enough to stay in the room for the discussion. So why was the Beat 2 Supervisor so upset about the medical insurance? Something is missing from this picture. Why would anyone be so upset if other Supervisors are trying to save the County money and give employees more benefits? As William Shakespeare said, “Something is rotten in Denmark.”
And here’s another thing I didn’t like. The same woman from Cigna was sitting right next to me during the 15 Jun 2012 meeting. While the representative of the other company was taking her turn addressing the Board of Supervisors, this woman was bouncing around in her seat and swinging her head around to look behind her. I don’t think she realized her long hair was hitting me in the face each time she did this.
When the meeting was over, I turned to this woman and said I was a resident of Tunica County and I wished she would act more professionally when attending our meetings. You know what she did? She jumped up and said OMG I’m being harassed and found a deputy to complain to while continuing to back out of the Board Room. What a joke! Something is really rotten in Tunica. We need to know just what it is.
For the past 6 or 7 years Tunica County’s medical insurance has been carried by Cigna. The County’s policy runs from 1 Jun to 31 May of each year. Apparently, the County Administrator received an update from Cigna sometime in Apr 2012 but he did not share this information with the Board of Supervisors. What was he thinking?
During this period of time, another insurance company made a presentation at a Board of Supervisors’ meeting and if I understand this correctly, the new company offered more benefits to Tunica County employees at a reduced rate to the County.
Now, this is where it gets interesting. At the first Jun meeting of the Board of Supervisors, representatives of both insurance companies were present. What I found very upsetting was a statement made by the woman from Cigna. She told everyone present that 1.) She needed an answer today as to whether Tunica County was going to renew the contract with her company and 2.) Cigna was holding and not paying all claims submitted to them from providers of medical benefits to Tunica County employees. What? Excuse me but this policy is paid monthly by our government and the Jun premium has been paid. How dare you come into our County and threaten non-payment of medical claims when your company has been paid for this service.
At the above meeting, the Board of Supervisors decided to continue discussion of the County’s medical insurance until the 15 Jun 2012 meeting.
In between these two meetings, more then a few Tunica County employees were given information that was either false or misleading. Who did this and why would they do this? To me, the answer became obvious at the 15 Jun 2012 meeting.
At the 15 Jun 2012 Board of Supervisors’ meeting the room was packed. Was the attendance staged or did the attendees come of their own free will. Who knows?
What I saw was disgusting on the part of the Beat 2 Supervisor. This Supervisor can’t be bothered with other issues like paying the claims. Don’t take my word for it. Go read the Public Records and you will find “Absent” on the line that would have contained his signature had he cared enough to stay in the room for the discussion. So why was the Beat 2 Supervisor so upset about the medical insurance? Something is missing from this picture. Why would anyone be so upset if other Supervisors are trying to save the County money and give employees more benefits? As William Shakespeare said, “Something is rotten in Denmark.”
And here’s another thing I didn’t like. The same woman from Cigna was sitting right next to me during the 15 Jun 2012 meeting. While the representative of the other company was taking her turn addressing the Board of Supervisors, this woman was bouncing around in her seat and swinging her head around to look behind her. I don’t think she realized her long hair was hitting me in the face each time she did this.
When the meeting was over, I turned to this woman and said I was a resident of Tunica County and I wished she would act more professionally when attending our meetings. You know what she did? She jumped up and said OMG I’m being harassed and found a deputy to complain to while continuing to back out of the Board Room. What a joke! Something is really rotten in Tunica. We need to know just what it is.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Report on the Election Commission
At this evening's Board of Supervisors' Meeting, 15 Jun 2012, the Transparency Committee again reported on the Election Commission. These are our findings:
A. Meetings are not being posted as required by the MS Open Meetings Act. Tunica County employs a full-time Public Information Officer. If the Election Commission cannot find the time to comply with the Open Meetings Act, why can't the Public Information Officer be assign this task? Come to think of it, why isn't the Public Information Officer publishing all meetings of public entities?“
B. Jun 2012: No meeting was held because the Courthouse was locked. And this isn't the first time this has happened. For this year alone, the Election Commission has been locked out of the Courthouse in Feb and Jun 2012.
C. A meeting couldn't be held anyway as only 2 Commissioners showed up and there had to be 3 of the 5 Commissioners for a quorum. What is the deal with the Tunica County Election Commission? Why don't you have a quorum at so many of your meetings?
D. There has been no transcription help offered as requested by the Board of Supervisors on 13 Apr 2012. From the Secretary of State's website, we learned that “they (the Election Commission) act as a group, through their minutes, which should be filed with the circuit clerk of the county." Conclusion: At the 13 Apr 2012, Board of Supervisors' President, James Dunn, asked the County Administrator to check into this situation and see what could be done to help. This hasn't happened. Surprise!!! NOT!!!!
We also found information in the MS Code:
25-41-11. Minutes of meetings
(1) MS Code 25-41-11. Minutes of meetings: "Minutes shall be kept of all meetings of a public body, whether in open or executive session, showing the members present and absent; the date, time and place of the meeting; an accurate recording of any final actions taken at such meeting; and a record, by individual member, of any votes taken; and any other information that the public body requests be included or reflected in the minutes. The minutes shall be recorded within a reasonable time not to exceed thirty (30) days after recess or adjournment and shall be open to public inspection during regular business hours." End of MS Code
Since Feb 2012, the Transparency Committee has been asking both the Circuit Clerk and the Election Committee to review their minutes for 2011. All we are getting is a run around. Additionally, Election Commission Minutes are hand written and therefore are subject to change by anyone who can lay their hands on these documents.
E. Election commissions are also responsible for hearing and resolving disputes concerning the denial of voter registration by a circuit clerk. If the dispute is resolved in favor of the applicant, the individual is placed on the voter rolls by the election commission. This is the only time that the election commission may place a name onto a voter roll. However, if the public is unaware of when the Tunica County Election Commission meets, how can they get their problem(s) solved?
F. “A circuit clerk is required to attend the regularly scheduled meetings of the election commission.” This is not being done. I've been there and the Circuit Clerk has not.
G. “A circuit clerk must also give all assistance that he is capable of giving to the election commissioners to assist them in the revision of voter rolls.” So, let's see, the Circuit Clerk is not at the Election Commission Meetings; the Circuit Clerk does not provide the Election Commission with a printed copy of the current voter rolls for use during their meetings; and during their meetings, the Election Commission does not have computer access to the SEMS system. All of this is just plain wrong.
H. “A circuit clerk keeps copies of the minutes of the meetings of the county election commissioners. Those minutes are prepared by the election commission when official action has been taken.” But when a person goes to the Circuit Clerk and asks to see the minutes, she doesn't have them and tells you they are in the locked Election Commission room upstairs.
In conclusion, just what are the citizens of Tunica County supposed to do? In answer to this question, this is what we found in the MS Code:
25-41-15. Enforcement of chapter; civil penalty
"The Mississippi Ethics Commission shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter upon a complaint filed by any person. Upon receiving a complaint, the commission shall forward a copy of the complaint to the head of the public body involved. The public body shall have fourteen (14) days from receipt of the complaint to file a response with the commission. After receiving the response to the complaint or, if no response is received after fourteen (14) days, the commission, in its discretion, may dismiss the complaint or proceed by setting a hearing in accordance with rules and regulations promulgated by the Ethics Commission.
After a hearing, the Ethics Commission may order the public body to take whatever reasonable measures necessary, if any, to comply with this chapter. If the Ethics Commission finds that a member or members of a public body has willfully and knowingly violated the provisions of this chapter, the Ethics Commission may impose a civil penalty upon the individual members of the public body found to be in violation of the provision of this chapter in a sum not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for a first offense and One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for a second or subsequent offense, plus all reasonable expenses incurred by the person or persons in bringing the complaint to enforce this chapter."
Don't know about you, but I'm ready to file a complaint.
A. Meetings are not being posted as required by the MS Open Meetings Act. Tunica County employs a full-time Public Information Officer. If the Election Commission cannot find the time to comply with the Open Meetings Act, why can't the Public Information Officer be assign this task? Come to think of it, why isn't the Public Information Officer publishing all meetings of public entities?“
B. Jun 2012: No meeting was held because the Courthouse was locked. And this isn't the first time this has happened. For this year alone, the Election Commission has been locked out of the Courthouse in Feb and Jun 2012.
C. A meeting couldn't be held anyway as only 2 Commissioners showed up and there had to be 3 of the 5 Commissioners for a quorum. What is the deal with the Tunica County Election Commission? Why don't you have a quorum at so many of your meetings?
D. There has been no transcription help offered as requested by the Board of Supervisors on 13 Apr 2012. From the Secretary of State's website, we learned that “they (the Election Commission) act as a group, through their minutes, which should be filed with the circuit clerk of the county." Conclusion: At the 13 Apr 2012, Board of Supervisors' President, James Dunn, asked the County Administrator to check into this situation and see what could be done to help. This hasn't happened. Surprise!!! NOT!!!!
We also found information in the MS Code:
25-41-11. Minutes of meetings
(1) MS Code 25-41-11. Minutes of meetings: "Minutes shall be kept of all meetings of a public body, whether in open or executive session, showing the members present and absent; the date, time and place of the meeting; an accurate recording of any final actions taken at such meeting; and a record, by individual member, of any votes taken; and any other information that the public body requests be included or reflected in the minutes. The minutes shall be recorded within a reasonable time not to exceed thirty (30) days after recess or adjournment and shall be open to public inspection during regular business hours." End of MS Code
Since Feb 2012, the Transparency Committee has been asking both the Circuit Clerk and the Election Committee to review their minutes for 2011. All we are getting is a run around. Additionally, Election Commission Minutes are hand written and therefore are subject to change by anyone who can lay their hands on these documents.
E. Election commissions are also responsible for hearing and resolving disputes concerning the denial of voter registration by a circuit clerk. If the dispute is resolved in favor of the applicant, the individual is placed on the voter rolls by the election commission. This is the only time that the election commission may place a name onto a voter roll. However, if the public is unaware of when the Tunica County Election Commission meets, how can they get their problem(s) solved?
F. “A circuit clerk is required to attend the regularly scheduled meetings of the election commission.” This is not being done. I've been there and the Circuit Clerk has not.
G. “A circuit clerk must also give all assistance that he is capable of giving to the election commissioners to assist them in the revision of voter rolls.” So, let's see, the Circuit Clerk is not at the Election Commission Meetings; the Circuit Clerk does not provide the Election Commission with a printed copy of the current voter rolls for use during their meetings; and during their meetings, the Election Commission does not have computer access to the SEMS system. All of this is just plain wrong.
H. “A circuit clerk keeps copies of the minutes of the meetings of the county election commissioners. Those minutes are prepared by the election commission when official action has been taken.” But when a person goes to the Circuit Clerk and asks to see the minutes, she doesn't have them and tells you they are in the locked Election Commission room upstairs.
In conclusion, just what are the citizens of Tunica County supposed to do? In answer to this question, this is what we found in the MS Code:
25-41-15. Enforcement of chapter; civil penalty
"The Mississippi Ethics Commission shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter upon a complaint filed by any person. Upon receiving a complaint, the commission shall forward a copy of the complaint to the head of the public body involved. The public body shall have fourteen (14) days from receipt of the complaint to file a response with the commission. After receiving the response to the complaint or, if no response is received after fourteen (14) days, the commission, in its discretion, may dismiss the complaint or proceed by setting a hearing in accordance with rules and regulations promulgated by the Ethics Commission.
After a hearing, the Ethics Commission may order the public body to take whatever reasonable measures necessary, if any, to comply with this chapter. If the Ethics Commission finds that a member or members of a public body has willfully and knowingly violated the provisions of this chapter, the Ethics Commission may impose a civil penalty upon the individual members of the public body found to be in violation of the provision of this chapter in a sum not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for a first offense and One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for a second or subsequent offense, plus all reasonable expenses incurred by the person or persons in bringing the complaint to enforce this chapter."
Don't know about you, but I'm ready to file a complaint.
Friday, June 15, 2012
A Seat at the Table
For some time now, we have been watching the actions of the Tunica County Sheriff at Board of Supervisors’ Meetings.
Since the first of the year, Sheriff Hamp, when present, has walked in and stated: “All rise, the Tunica County Board of Supervisors’ is now in session.” What the heck is this all about?
This is what the MS Code says about the Sheriff’s attendance at Board of Supervisors’ Meetings:
MS Code Ann. 19-3-25 (2011) Sheriff to attend meetings. “The sheriff of the county shall attend all meetings of the board of supervisors, either in person or by deputy, and shall execute all its process and orders.”
That’s it. This one sentence does not say anything about the Sheriff sitting at the Board of Supervisors’ table. This one sentence does not say anything about the Sheriff wedging himself between the Board President and the Board Attorney. What is all of this foolishness?
Actually Sheriff Hamp, your time would be better spent learning when you may execute an arrest and when you may execute a citation.
Since the first of the year, Sheriff Hamp, when present, has walked in and stated: “All rise, the Tunica County Board of Supervisors’ is now in session.” What the heck is this all about?
This is what the MS Code says about the Sheriff’s attendance at Board of Supervisors’ Meetings:
MS Code Ann. 19-3-25 (2011) Sheriff to attend meetings. “The sheriff of the county shall attend all meetings of the board of supervisors, either in person or by deputy, and shall execute all its process and orders.”
That’s it. This one sentence does not say anything about the Sheriff sitting at the Board of Supervisors’ table. This one sentence does not say anything about the Sheriff wedging himself between the Board President and the Board Attorney. What is all of this foolishness?
Actually Sheriff Hamp, your time would be better spent learning when you may execute an arrest and when you may execute a citation.
Employee Handbook
At the Board of Supervisors’ Meeting this morning, 4 Jun 2012, the Board approved the new Employee Handbook. Yes!!!!
One Supervisor asked about the Moonlighting requirements. This section was read aloud and it was essentially the same policy as was contained in the 2003 Handbook. The District 2 Supervisor asked if this was legal. He was told by the Board’s Attorney that this requirement was legal. Next, the District 2 Supervisor asked if this requirement was fair and proposed to the Board that they have a “gentleman’s agreement” not to enforce this part of the Employee Handbook. This statement was followed by laughter from the Board and the audience.
So, here’s the deal Mr. District 2 Supervisor: Do you still have Tunica County Employees working in your place of business? Then get the letters written and bring them before the Tunica County Board of Supervisors for approval of their Moonlighting employment. Right now, you are out of compliance with the 2003 AND the 2012 Tunica County Employee Handbook.
One Supervisor asked about the Moonlighting requirements. This section was read aloud and it was essentially the same policy as was contained in the 2003 Handbook. The District 2 Supervisor asked if this was legal. He was told by the Board’s Attorney that this requirement was legal. Next, the District 2 Supervisor asked if this requirement was fair and proposed to the Board that they have a “gentleman’s agreement” not to enforce this part of the Employee Handbook. This statement was followed by laughter from the Board and the audience.
So, here’s the deal Mr. District 2 Supervisor: Do you still have Tunica County Employees working in your place of business? Then get the letters written and bring them before the Tunica County Board of Supervisors for approval of their Moonlighting employment. Right now, you are out of compliance with the 2003 AND the 2012 Tunica County Employee Handbook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)