“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.

Board of Supervisors’ Meeting 13 Apr 2012

Did you forget something? Last Fri night at 5p was the second Board of Supervisors’ Meeting for the month of May. The next meeting is on Mon, 30 Apr 2012 at 5p. Mark your calendars. These meetings are important.

The Transparency Committee presented the results of some of the projects we have been working on. Some projects contained new discoveries and others we have had long discussions about with the Board of Supervisors and we were asking for conclusions.

The reports by the Transparency Committee were placed in alphabetical order for delivery. A copy of our reporting and documentation is always left with the Board of Supervisors. This committee does not and has not asked for an appointment without being prepared. The subjects presented were: Claims for Mar 2012; the Election Commission; R. C. Irwin Library; the Recreation Department and Tunica National.

To save time and to not “bombard” the reader with too much information, let’s just skip to Tunica National. In Jan 2012, this Committee sent a Freedom of Information letter to the County Administrator and the Board’s Attorney. In the letter we asked for the names and addresses of each and every member of Tunica National.

The first letter received no response. So, we asked again and received a letter from the Board’s Attorney stating that Tunica County did not have the requested information. In 2003, there was an act of the MS State Legislature submitted by Rep. Henderson

“TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF TUNICA COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO TUNICA COUNTY PUBLIC PROJECTS, INC., OR TUNICA COUNTY ARENA AND EXPOSITION CENTER, INC., OR BOTH, FOR THE MANAGEMENT, PROMOTION, OPERATION AND MAINTENACE OF A PUBLIC GOLF AND TENNIS COMPLEX, ARENA AND RIVER PARK; TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF TUNICA COUNTY TO LEASE SUCH PUBLIC FACILITIES TO SUCH ENTITIES; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.”

This Committee couldn’t figure out why this would be necessary. So, we asked. What we were told is that there are some things our County government could not do, like “run gift shops” and this legislation took care of that.

At this point, Mr. Dunn said we were “bombarding” the Board with too much information at 5p on a Fri night. Mr. Dunn, you are paid approximately $1000 for each meeting of the Board of Supervisors. If you are in a hurry, give the gavel to Mr. Nickson and be on your way. We were there on a Fri night. Why was it such a hardship on you?

Back to the story of Tunica National: By the time the Transparency Committee met the next day, we had learned that there are 2458 government owned golf courses in these United States. Can you imagine any golf course not having a pro shop?

We also found some interesting case studies looking at the pros and cons of government operating government owed golf courses. Oh, but we wouldn’t want to “bombard” the reader with too much information.

Letter sent to the Tunica County Board of Education

At the Transparency Committee Meeting on 10 Mar 2012 we discussed the handout from the Board of Education Meeting in Feb 2012.

Year Plan and Expected Graduation Rate

Year 1: 2011-2012: 52.7%

Year 2: 2012-2013: 57%

Year 3: 2013-2014: 65%

Year 4: 2014-2015: 76%

Year 5: 2015-2016: 85%

What we would like to know is the following:

1. Of the students who graduated in the 2010-2011 school year, how many entered a 2 year college and how many entered a four year college.

2. Of the students who graduated in the 2010-2011 school year, how many had to take remedial classes before starting their college curriculum.

Waiting for an answer.

52.7%

This number represents the anticipated graduation rate in the public school district of Tunica County for the 2011-2012 school year. This letter is not about the current Superintendent of Education. This letter is about the process of how we have chosen to fill our Superintendent position.

A couple of weeks ago, Bob and I attended a special ceremony honoring Dr. Bobby Papasan. What I think I understood from the many comments was that we need to be hiring a Superintendent of Education not electing a Superintendent of Education. This is a belief long held in our household.

Why are we allowing the future of our children and the future development of our County to be decided by a popularity contest? Didn’t we learn anything from the past election and re-election of our former Superintendent of Education?

We need to change the process from electing to hiring the best qualified candidate to be our Superintendent of Education.

I can't believe we are going to build...

Here we go again. It appears the Board of Supervisors is going to build yet another facility. So, where is the feasibility study?

Perhaps what you all need to be discussing is the repurposing of our current facilities.

Okay, so now I'm mad...really mad

Today is the MS Primary. So, my husband and I showed up to vote at our Precinct.

Someone at the table must have known my name because the check-off lady noted my name in the Republican book. Are you kidding me? Was she looking at the color of my skin and "assuming" I would be voting Republican?

We all had a good laugh when I loudly stated I was voting in the Democratic Primary but the more I've thought about it this afternoon the madder I've become.

I am just so offended that anyone would...well, number one, think I would vote for any of those Republican Clowns and number two assume I would be voting Republican because I happen to be white.

I have a brain and I use it. Arrrrrgh!!!!

This just ain't right...

On the agenda for the Board of Supervisors’ 29 Feb 2012 meeting, item #7 asked the Board to “Consider Homeland Security Cooperative Grant in the amount of $300,000.00 for Force Protection Program.” We were told this was a 100% grant and that a separate accounting number would be given to this Grant so that the funds could be tracked. Well, hallelujah for that.

Upon examination of the claims for the month of Feb 2012 we found disbursements from this grant to be $101,499.45. So, Sheriff Hamp, how can you spend money before the Board of Supervisor has approved the funding?

Ah, so you want to know what was purchased with this huge amount of money? Well, you could go to the Public Records and look it up for yourself or you could wait for the Transparency Committee to do all the work and just tell you. I guess we’ll go with the Transparency Committee. The Sheriff spent $1399.00 on body bags (isn’t this a Coroner’s expense?) continuing: $50.00 on shipping; $90,288.20 for riot equipment; $6,819.20 for telephones and $3,002.45 for rooms and meals.

There are some who would say, so what, it’s a 100% grant and someone is going to get the money from Homeland Security so why not Tunica County? First of all, it’s still our money, meaning the funding for this grant came from the United State Government and that be us. Secondly, just because you can do something doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do.

So, here it is, the Tunica County version of a “Bridge to Nowhere.” Please write to your representatives in Congress and use this as an example of wasteful spending.

15 Feb 2012 Board of Supervisors' Meeting @ 5p

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Now this is a riot....

Did you know that Tunica County is now the proud owner of $6348.84 worth of Riot Equipment? Not very funny is it?

Taking Responsibility for Your Vote

It's not just our duty to vote, we need to be responsible for the results. For awhile now, I've felt that those who voted to put Bush and Chaney into office should be helping to clean-up the mess Bush and Co. hoisted on our country. I don't see this happening. And what about those who didn't bother to vote? As fellow Americans, where is their responsibilty in all of this mess?

What about our local elections? What is our individual responsibility here in Tunica County?

Here's an example to mull over: In Beat 2 there are approximately 1200 registered voters. On 8 Nov 2011, 665 votes were cast for the office of Beat 2 Supervisor. These 665 votes represent 55% of the 1200 registered voters in Beat 2. This would mean that 45% or 535 of the registered voters in Beat 2 did not want to vote or did not bother to vote. So, the question is this: By not voting does a person have any responsibility to their fellow citizens?

Now, let's go back and work with the 665 votes that were cast for the position of Beat 2 Supervisor. Of the 665 votes cast, 424 went to Burnett and 241 went to Hudson. The 424 votes represents 33% of the 1200 registered voters in Beat 2. The 241 votes represents 20% of the 1200 registered voters in Beat 2.

This means that 80% or 959 (424 + 535) of the registered voters in Beat 2 either voted for Burnett or didn't vote at all. To my way of thinking, this 80% of the registered voters in Beat 2 are, for the next 4 years, responsible for the performance of the Beat 2 Supervisor. Good luck with that.

Posting of Meetings

Why isn't this being done consistently?

I spent just over a year trying to convince the Election Commission that it was their responsibilty to post their meetings.

It is so annoying to feel I need to put these meetings on this website. It is not my job!!! That being said and since our various Boards are not posting their respective meetings, these are the meeting I have on my mind at the moment.

31 Jan 2012: Board of Supervisors @ 9a.
6 Feb 2012: Board of Supervisors @ 9a.
7 Feb 2012: Board of Alderman @ 3p.
8 Feb 2012: Board of Education @ 5p.
14 Feb 2012: Election Commission @ 5:30p.
15 Feb 2012: Board of Supervisors @ 5p.
21 Feb 2012: Board of Alderman @ 3p.
29 Feb 2012: Board of Supervisors @ 5p.

Don't count on this information showing up here each month. Call your representatives and ask them to post their meetings as the Open Meeting laws require. Thank you so very much.

BTW on Sat, 11 Feb 2012, Tunicans for Transparency in Government will meet in the R. C. Irwin Library at 1p. Everyone is welcome.

Why are our legal expenses so high?

It appears to me Tunica County government is setting us up for these employee lawsuits because the Board of Supervisors does not have in place what is expected of any other $45 million business.

Here are a few ideas to turn this situation around:

1. Each employee should be given a job description.

2. Each employee should have a yearly review as close as possible to their employment anniversary.

3. Each employee should have a current Employee Handbook.

4. The Employee Handbook should be reviewed annually with any changes added to the Board of Supervisors' Minutes and changes sent to all employees. It needs to be noted this rewrite has been in the works for about 2 years. Come on, get the job done.

So, what is the cost to Tunica County for not getting our house in order? The cost in Nov 2011 was just shy of $50,000.00.

Transparency Meeting 14 Jan 2012

Tunicans for Transparency in Government will hold their meeting Saturday, 14 Jan 2012, at the R. C. Irwin Library at 1 p.m. All adult residents of Tunica County and all elected officials of Tunica County are welcome to attend.

A light bulb moment

For me...

Since the Board of Supervisors' Meeting this morning, I have received a few disgruntled comments...all from white Tunicans.

First of all, I do not believe Tunica is going to become another Clarksdale just because the color of the skin of the present Board of Supervisors happens to be black. That being said, we could become another Clarksdale if the character of this Board of Supervisors is not above reproach. Unfortunately, that means this Board of Supervisors has to be better then the last Board and they have to serve all of the residents of Tunica.

Further, if you are one of the Tunica residents who sat on your butt and now wants to complain...talk to the hand. I've found that in most cases, you don't know what you are talking about because you haven't taken the time to discover the truth.

Maybe the changes from the last election are not the best we can do but it's a start.