If a section could, as you suggest, remove mention of the OPA appointed ECC in the DR, why not go to the source and remove mention of the OPA in the DR?

I believe that would be much more complex and perhaps not legal, for a number of reasons. Look at the use of the word "aggregate" and phrase "subdivision as a whole" in the original DRs (I don't know what the later ones say).

I don't believe a section can pull out of the Ocean Pines subdivision, but think there is a good chance a section can unilaterally change DRs for the section within certain parameters. This would, in any event, be a bit tricky since I have a feeling a court would say the DRs are designed to protect both the section and the subdivision as a whole.

We'll never know for certain unless some section tries to make a unilateral change. In my view a good judge would decide on any OPA challenge on the basis of whether or not the proposed change would somehow harm the other sections.

Where some proposed change was more restrictive, a court might well approve. There are certainly scenarios where the court might see a DR change for a section as very less restrictive and damaging to the other sections. In between these two extremes are any number of possibilities where it is anyone's guess.

I doubt we'll be seeing any attempts to change a section, and my views on what a judge might or might not do are pure speculation -- of course.

So, if I were so inclined and wanted to avoid a failed attempt at DR change due to poor speculation of what a court might do, the way to approach a change would be to submit a proposed change to the entire subdivision -- all sections and lots. A more difficult hurdle if we assume it would take a majority of lots in each section to obtain a positive result. However, with a very careful selection of proposed changes, slam dunk items if there are any, or even some mildly controversial issues (depending on the political mood of the lot owners at the time) I think changes can be accomplished by interested lot owners for a total cost of under $25,000.

However, one way to avoid such possible actions by association members and insure a higher degree of harmony and acceptance of compliance is by common sense application of the existing DRs. I think ECC/OPA is doing a better job now than in the recent past but since Olson's arrival we have gravitated more toward nitpicking and relatively unimportant items along with better enforcement of the bad stuff. There is too much attention to technicality and bureaucratic compliance and not enough to the principle of "do no harm."

Am I making any sense?