Ward I - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Apr 29, 2005

Ward I

Date: May 1, 2005

Let me get this straight: Bradley wants us to vote for him so that he can use his authority on the City Council to tell us that we don't know how to cast an informed vote??

Date: May 1, 2005

I think Kim's comment stems from a generalized lack of understanding about how these bond issues usually happen. The following is what I think happened (went wrong?). If there are any errors in my thinking, please feel free to correct them. I've got a thick skin.

Bond issues of this type are usually done as a "package" of money for the university coupled with some community projects in every ward. With something for everyone, the issue passes easily. The city might have problems passing a bond issue for capital improvements on its own and the University might have problems on its own. Working together both entities can get something they might not be able to get on their own. My recollection is that the City and USM briefly discussed such a deal, but the negotiations failed for some reason. The culprits in the failure of the negotitations isn't clear to me. At that point, USM tried to "go it alone" and got whacked at the polls.

I don't think Kim and many others understand that the problem was not the Mayor's silence on the actual vote. Unfortunately, as a political neophyte he and many others expected the City to knee jerk support the issue without realizing that the one or both sides dropped the ball on this one. The problem was that the issue was not put to the voter's in the usual way these things are done and the City Adminstration could hardly be expected to be enthusiastic about an issue that normally would have included some projects for many parts of the city.

Please feel free to correct any errors or fill in any blanks.

Date: May 1, 2005

The reason Duprees bond issue failed is because it's was unconstitutional. He was proposing using bond money for re-occuring expenses such as paving streets.

Under state law in MS, you can not use bond money for such projects, thus, Dupree's proposal has never gotten past the City Council, because there is no use sending a proposal to the legislature that is in direct violation of state law, becaue it won't get out of committee.

Just another example of the fact that our current mayor has no concept on how to follow laws regarding running the city.

Vote for Someone Else

Date: May 1, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Seeker
"Vote for Someone Else"

I do not live in Hattiesburg. While I am often unhappy with the political happenings where I do live, I do not regret that I do not live in Hattiesburg. But I will propose an alternative to voting for someone else: don't vote. Voting simply reinforces the perception that acceptable candidates are running. If you have some deep-seating belieft that voting is your "responsibility as a citizen," then go to the polls & cast a blank ballot.

I still have not seen an answer for my question: How many of the donors reported for the various candidates in fact do not reside within the city limits of Hattiesburg? My perception as a South Mississippian is that a lot of the people who complain about Dupree are really complaining about the ascendency of "black politics" in the Hub City & are the very people who bailed to Oak Grove & Petal years ago in Hattiesburg's version of "white flight." It's exactly the same as the way folks who live in Madison County whine about the deterioration of Jackson.

Date: May 1, 2005

Thank you for that information. It appears that neither side had enough brains to hire a consultant to craft something that everyone could have lived with.

Disclosure: will vote for Senne next week (he'll lose) and abstain from the general election.

Date: May 1, 2005

Don't abstain. Vote for Senne and if he loses (and maybe he wont' -- I know four people who have recently decided to vote for him) then write him in in the general election.

Date: May 1, 2005

I plan to vote for Col. Senne......

Date: May 1, 2005

I and my family will vote for Senne in round one.

Date: May 1, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"Don't abstain. Vote for Senne and if he loses (and maybe he wont' -- I know four people who have recently decided to vote for him) then write him in in the general election."

What a truly excellent idea! I am grateful that there are some folks out there with more brains than me (not an unusual circumstance).

Date: May 1, 2005

He's got my vote too.

Date: May 1, 2005

When I started this thread, I wanted to send the message that I'm not likely to vote for a candidate (Bradley) who lets me know that he doesn't like the way I vote (on the bond issue). Now that the discussion has segued to the mayor's race, I will cheerfully hop on the Senne bandwagon. The Shelboo machine has tentacles which reach far into the community, and will remain firmly planted there, even when he has left the Dome. Senne at least offers the hope that he is free of that influence.

Date: May 1, 2005

Voter,

My apologies if I inadvertently led the thread in an unintended direction. Perhaps less obtusely I was trying to say that Kim Bradley is not really a bad guy. He absolutely "bleeds" black and gold and can't conceive how anyone in this area could be against something even marginally beneficial to USM. People in this group are very disappointed in the actions of the mayor. They don't seem to realize it could have happened under the right set of circumstances (see above). Rather than telling people how to vote, my take is these folks still don't understand how this could have been made to work. From Seeker's post above apparently the Mayor doesn't know either. What a mess.

Date: May 2, 2005

Q&A,

Many issues are interconnected. Bradley can bleed black and gold all he wants, but when he starts bleeding taxpayer money, he should be exceptionally careful. I believe voters had very clear ideas why they voted against the bond issue. They included a combination of the following: 1) they did not approve of the use to which the money was to be put; 2) they did not feel that the "improvements" would in fact evenly affect the community at large; 3) there was a distinct anti-Shelby sentiment to the vote; 4) when the tax for the Convention Center was put in place (I voted for it), we were promised it would be retired--it has not been; 5) taxing locally to benefit a state institution is opening a real can of worms indeed--what's next, taxing to benefit Keesler, Camp Shelby, Paul B. Johnson State Park? The community benefits from those, too. I talked to many people of all walks of life about the bond issue, and couldn't find anyone who would openly support it. After the spectacle of Giannini scolding the voters like wayward children, it is exceptionally unfortunate that Bradley chooses the same tack. I would say that it bespeaks a decided insensitivity to his putative constituents. Especially after all the dismal press USM has received of late, I would have at least let that sleeping dog lie. Given also the grave misgivings many of us have about Bradley's commitment to residential integrity in Ward I, I am afraid it appears he is woefully out of touch with this Voter and many others.

Date: May 3, 2005

Since the bond issue was Shelby's baby, clearly Bradley doesn't mind having his name associated with Thames and his machine--not the best way to attract voters at USM, I'd warrant.