The Mississippi Gaming Commission recently released a statement in regard its 3-0 vote on March 16 denying site approval for casinos in Biloxi and Diamondhead. According to the statement, commissioners said both RW Development and Diamondhead Real Estate failed to meet the burden of proof that their sites met the statutory and regulatory requirements. Also, they said both sites were not within 800 feet of the mean high-water line. As a result, commissioners stated since they found the sites to be illegal, it was not necessary to determine the suitability of either location for a casino site. Both developers have appealed the commission’s rulings.
It was the second time the developers were denied site approval for their properties. Previously, a different set of commissioners denied the approvals.
Regarding RW Development’s site on Veterans Avenue in Biloxi, the commissioners said, “In this location, the toe of the seawall is not the mean high-water line. Therefore, the proposed site is not within 800 feet of the high-water line.” The statement said the developer tried to draw the mean high-water line at the toe of the seawall, and located the casino within 800 feet of this line. “The applicant’s survey ignores the sand beach that exists south of the seawall and attempts to redefine the plain language used in Miss. Code Ann. Section 29-15-1,” the commissioners stated.
In its application, commissioners said Diamondhead Real Estate sought to draw the high-water line of the bay at the edge of a harbor channel extending north from a perimeter canal. The proposed site was not on the Bay of St. Louis and sits more than 800 feet from the mean high-water line, commissioners stated, adding, “To the south of the perimeter canal exists several thousand feet of privately owned salt marsh and then the open water of the bay.” Opponents provided maps that put the mean high-water line at the southern edge of the marsh. Therefore, commissioners said, “It is the position of the commission that the St. Louis Bay, as contemplated in Sec. 97-33-1, does not include the salt marsh and that the St. Louis Bay terminates as indicated on the attached maps.”
