and was merely dumping debris where it was told by the county. ¶ 24. As to the effect of the different contracts, Kelley Brothers and Gregory first argue the unrecorded contract controls because it was the contract Kelley Brothers signed and operated under. While this indeed may be so, we note that the recorded version of the contract also contains the purported signature of Kelley Brother’s president, Jerry, though it appears to be photocopied. And the contract upon which Kelley Brothers relies was apparently not the version attached to the Board’s minutes, bearing the page-number stamp, indicating it was recorded in the minute book. See Mound Bayou Sch. Dist. v. Cleveland, Sch. Dist., 817 So.2d 578, 582 (¶ 12) (Miss.2002) (citing Nichols v. Patterson, 678 So.2d 673, 676 (Miss.1996)) (<HOLDING>). Still, though our curiosity is piqued by the
holding that the government was not bound by its waivers in three prior contracts recognizing that zoning agency bodies   are not bound by strict rules of evidence holding public bodies may not be bound by contracts without evidence of the contract terms in the minutes holding that party was an agent under the plain terms of his contracts holding that the court was not bound by the parties agreement that contracts were unambiguous and holding that contracts were ambiguous