Private Recordings Reveal a Different Side of Ocean Springs Alderman

OCEAN SPRINGS, MS (GC Wire) – Newly obtained audio recordings and private text messages reveal striking differences between what Ocean Springs Alderman at Large Matthew Hinton has said behind closed doors and the positions he has taken publicly.

The recordings capture Hinton discussing evidence of ownership promises involving the city’s controversial $8 million parking garage, encouraging information to reach GC Wire, criticizing fellow Alderman Kevin Wade, and appearing to agree that Mayor Bobby Cox should replace City Attorney David Harris.

Yet publicly, Hinton has repeatedly supported the garage lease, criticized the disclosure of information to the press, aligned himself with Wade, and voted to retain Harris.

The November 4, 2025, recording offers a revealing look at the positions Hinton expressed privately, and what he chose not to share when addressing the public.

The $8 Million Garage: What Hinton Didn’t Tell the Public

On November 18, 2025, Hinton addressed the Board of Aldermen concerning the controversial downtown parking garage, which was constructed using approximately $8 million in state grant funding.

The central controversy was whether the city was originally promised ownership of the garage, as stated in the grant application, or whether the project was always intended to result in a 99-year lease.

The application explicitly stated:

“OHOS Land, LLC has entered into an agreement in which it will transfer ownership of the parking garage and amenities to the City upon completing construction.”

That language has repeatedly been dismissed at City Hall as a developer’s sales pitch or aspirational statement.

But two weeks before his public remarks, Hinton revealed something significant during a private conversation.

“Carolyn wrote the GCRF grant,” he said, referring to city grant administrator Carolyn Martin.

According to Hinton, the application containing the ownership promise was written by the city itself, not a private attorney representing the development spewing a “sales pitch” as previously stated by City Hall.

Hinton also recalled the original ownership representations made when the project came before the Planning Commission in February 2022.

“They pleaded it to us and said, we’re wanting three parcels, the parking garage will belong to the city,” he recalled.

Then he revealed something else:

“And I’ve got emails that I’ve saved to this and my office computer that reference that.”

Neither his knowledge of the application’s authorship nor the existence of those emails was disclosed when Hinton publicly discussed the garage on November 18.

Instead, Hinton told the board that there had never been a firm ownership agreement and maintained that the arrangement was “always” a 99-year lease.

Despite holding that knowledge, he concluded by telling the Board and public:

“That is as much information that I have on it.”

A Love-Hate Relationship With the Press

Hinton’s relationship with the news media, particularly GC Wire, presents another contrast.

While still a candidate for office, Hinton approached GC Wire on the record with concerns about construction at the OS1515 development and encouraged an investigation. Those allegations could not be independently substantiated and were never published.

After taking office, Hinton publicly supported the garage lease involving that same development. Privately, however, he continued encouraging scrutiny.

During the November 4 recording, Hinton acknowledged sharing information with Alderman Karen Stennis about the developers allegedly using the publicly funded parking garage as collateral to obtain financing for their larger development.

“I’m the one that told Karen about all the stuff on the back side of the parking garage. And then Brian Rose got up tonight and talked about it. I’ll freely admit that,” Hinton said.

He added:

“I’m glad that Brian got up and talked about 1515 tonight.”

In June 2026, Hinton again encouraged Stennis to pass along information about the garage’s original ownership promises.

“If you happen to talk to Brian, just let him know. I’m wanting to bring this all out in the open public,” he wrote in a text message shared with GC Wire.

Hinton did not publicly present that information himself. But Brian did.

I know, because I am Brian.

The communications stand in contrast to Hinton’s public criticism of information being leaked to the press. Several witnesses have reported Hinton saying he will never take calls from GC Wire. He has. He has initiated calls to GC Wire, as well.

‘Kevin Wade Treats Me Like Sh*t’

Hinton has frequently appeared aligned with fellow Alderman Kevin Wade during public meetings. Privately, however, he described a very different relationship.

“Kevin’s treated me pretty much like sh*t since I voted not the way that he wanted in the very beginning,” Hinton said.

He complained that Wade had confronted him over four separate votes and later declared:

“I’m pushing Kevin out of it because I really don’t give a sh*t.”

Perhaps more revealing was Hinton’s account of the October 7, 2025, Board of Aldermen meeting, when he joined Wade in a brutal confrontation with Alderman Shannon Pfeiffer over her independent request for an Attorney General’s opinion concerning City Attorney David Harris’s conduct.

Wade and Hinton publicly objected to Pfeiffer’s letter, particularly its characterization as being submitted “on behalf of the Board” without the board’s authorization. The confrontation culminated in an effort to have the Attorney General disregard her inquiry.

But behind closed doors, Hinton admitted he had no objection to the questions themselves.

“The whole thing with the questions that you asked the AG’s office, I did not have a problem with,” Hinton said.

So what changed?

Hinton explained that he had been upset about learning of the inquiry through media coverage and the telephone calls that followed. He also appeared to acknowledge allowing pressure from others to influence his reaction.

“I got it pounded in my head because of how the letter was stated out,” he admitted.

In other words, Hinton appeared to acknowledge giving in to peer pressure over an inquiry he privately said he had no problem with.

He also criticized Wade’s behavior that night.

“The way that Kevin acted, my blood inside was boiling,” Hinton said.

Hinton disclosed that Wade had not written the prepared remarks he delivered against Pfeiffer, and later referred to the speech as “their scripted thing that Kevin had.”

He subsequently apologized for his own participation, acknowledging:

“No person, and especially a woman, should ever be put in that situation.”

Yet on October 20, 2026, nearly a year after that private apology, Hinton again raised his voice at Pfeiffer during a board meeting.

When Pfeiffer objected after Hinton attempted to introduce a competing motion while hers was already on the floor, Hinton responded:

“It’s because you overtalk every single time at this Board.”

His apology was private. His latest rebuke was public.

David Harris: Another Private Contradiction

Hinton has also repeatedly supported City Attorney David Harris, voting on several occasions to retain him and publicly praising his work.

He declined to attend a special meeting called by Pfeiffer and Stennis to discuss concerns involving Harris and supported the board’s October 7 effort to withdraw or disregard questions Pfeiffer submitted to the Attorney General.

But the November 4 recording captures a different response when the conversation turned to Harris’s future.

“If you’re worried about your friendship with Bobby, the one singular thing he could do to save this administration is move on from that man,” the other participant told Hinton, referring to Mayor Bobby Cox and Harris.

Hinton responded:

“Wish he could see it.”

The exchange suggests Hinton privately agreed that replacing Harris could benefit the administration, despite his repeated public votes to keep the attorney.

What the Public Heard… and What the Recordings Reveal

The recordings document Hinton privately discussing information he did not disclose during public debate, encouraging scrutiny he rarely pursued openly, criticizing a colleague he publicly supported, and expressing apparent agreement with replacing an attorney he repeatedly voted to retain.

Of those revelations, the parking garage remains particularly significant.

Hinton claimed to know that the city authored a grant application promising ownership of an $8 million public project. He also claimed to possess emails referencing those ownership promises.

Yet when he addressed the public just two weeks later, neither disclosure made it into his remarks.

Instead, he assured the board:

“That is as much information that I have on it.”