Board members Present:
President Suzzi Combs
John Porter
Vice President Rick Noffsinger
Joe Claflin
Secretary Faye Taylor
Diane Jones
Treasurer Tom Moore
Diane
Porterfield
Board member absent:
Jack Watson
President Suzzi Combs
welcomed the DH members to the Special Board meeting explaining that there are
3 items on the agenda. The first item
was a ‘straw vote’ involving a piece of ‘swamp’ property located down on
Coolwood, near the home of Diane Alexander.
This property is technically owned by Entergy and her dead must now
reflect that information before she may sell it. The vote was passed unanimously.
Item 2 on our
list is a disciplinary action. The reason that most of you are here tonight.
Article VI, Section 1. Item f. ‘It is
possible to remove a member of the Board whenever, in its judgment, the best
interests of the POA would be served thereby.’
Suzzi began to read a statement from Attorney Jonathon Jones:
"Attention POA Board members, this is privileged and
confidential information. I attended a
Board meeting on June 3rd, 2013 at the request of the president and
various members. The purpose behind same
was to provide updates on all active litigation concerning the DPOA. The majority of the discussion was properly
focused on the most complex case facing the community as a whole. The Ensminger vs. Chambliss state lawsuit and
contained a tremendous amount of information that is protected by the attorney
/ client privilege. I returned to work
Tuesday morning only to receive a perplexing phone call regarding the Ensminger
matter. The phone call was from the present
counsel for Chambliss, Miss Jerry Paine.
Miss Paine and I had a cordial, but awkward phone conversation in which
she, with astounding detail, repeated virtually every statement made within the
protected environment of the closed board meeting. Please note - This
information is regarding a pending lawsuit that carries massive liability and
economic ramifications if the DPOA is unsuccessful in its defense. I recounted the contents of this phone
conversation to the Board at the June 11th, 2013 Board meeting. Specifically, my utmost concern was given to
the nature of t his breach of confidentiality and fiduciary responsibility and
the almost undeniable liability of the DPOA if same is allowed to
continue. Since that time, said breach
has been acknowledged and admitted by Diane Porterfield. Thus I believe these actions to be the
opitomy of how Board members should not conduct themselves. Furthermore, the guilty of these
transgressions, after a previous breach, regarding the exact same case, by the
exact same member, is incomprehensible.
And therefore, I propose Miss Porterfield be removed from her position
on the board with utmost confidence and haste."
Suzzi: This is a very
serious matter. It is not something
taken lightly by this Board. And as you
can see, you are as shocked as well.
Diane: Do I get to
speak?
Suzzi: We will adjourn
to executive session and you may speak at that time.
Diane: You get to say
this, but I don’t get to speak out in public?
With that Suzzi handed Diane the microphone. “Thank you very much (for allowing me to
speak) because that was the first time I have heard that (statement from the
attorney) at all. I would have assumed
that I would have that information sent to me.
The following information was shared by Diane until stopped
by the president requesting Chief Joel Tyner to take the microphone away.
All the information concerning the Ensminger vs. Chambliss case can be found on this Blog:
Police Officer Please note the dates of postings.
The following is the email Diane sent in response to the President's question:
Good
morning all…
I had a terrific vacation! My
mother is doing great. And I had the opportunity to visit my sister and
her family for the first time in several years.
If you have not been to Oregon, I highly
recommend it.
Diane
Jerrie Paine said her clients called her with information that
could only have been gleaned from our executive session held on 6/3/13.
Did you disclose any information to anyone that may have been in contact with
the Chambliss' or were your in contact with the Chambliss' directly?
This question was posed by our attorney who directly questioned
each member in attendance at tonight's executive session.
Suzzi
Combs
501-282-1016
To answer your question:
No. I did not contact Jerry
Chambliss. I did discuss this issue with my husband, Sam. Sam
explained how ‘inept’ our attorney has been for many years. Sam sighted several
instances of past attorney neglect. I have also heard this same comment
from other members of past boards.
In fact, why did the Chambliss
attorney contact Jonathon Jones? What was the purpose of the phone
call?
Yes. You all know that I
have received information from Jerry Chambliss regarding his case against
Diamondhead. Yes, I know things about this case which you have refused to
listen. Since this issue began in July of 2010, this issue has been
mishandled (in my opinion).
- Why is Jonathon Jones
handling this case? It should be managed by our insurance company –
Western World. Which has a deductable of $500.00 --- not $15,000.00
- Was Jonathan Jones
correct in his statement that ‘this case is practically over because of
Jerry Paine’s neglect in filing documents in a timely fashion’?
- I was asked at Monday,
June 3rd, executive session à ‘Whose side are you on?’
….Answer: The truth.
If you think I have a conflict of
interest regarding this issue, than ban me from further discussion of this
topic.
I met a lady on the plane who is
an attorney with a firm who specialize in Community Associations. Her
name is Anne Williams and recommends this website:
Www.caionline.org
Diane Porterfield
__________________________
The above information was passed out to the attendees, and read aloud.
While Diane was speaking the Board left for Executive Session. Upon return, it was announced that Diane Porterfield was removed from the Board. The Board then excused themselves back to executive session to discuss 'personnel issues'.
