What the ECC cannot do is make rules or Guidelines more restrictive than the DRs. Surely you would agree; at least I hope you would agree.

You are wrong - again.  The ECC/ARC has set a "restriction" on residential lots that is absolutely more restrictive than in the DRs.  The Guidelines proscribe a "coverage" restriction limiting the size of the roof area of a house.  This is more restrictive than in the DRs or even in the County code.  Surely, you must be aware of this coverage rule as you videoed my presentation to the ECC a few years ago when I attempted to have the ECC relax its curtailment of the "5% additional coverage" practice that had been allowed for years.  The ECC had granted as many as 500 5% "variances without one denial until it with no announcement or providing no rationale stopped doing so.

The legal question is whether or not the Guidelines cross the line and set rules more restrictive than the DRs allow.

As far as I'm concerned, that "question" has been asked and answered when the Builders' Assn challenged the coverage rule in court and lost.

As you are well aware ECC sets none of these rules and guidelines. All the Guidelines are set in place only after approval by the Board of Directors.

I am well aware that, because the ECC failed to use its initiative and update its Guidelines, the OPA Board in 2006 decided to review and update the Guidelines for them.  This action came from certain members "prodding" the Board to do something about a problem that was getting out of hand.  The Board convened an ad hoc committee and reviewed the Guidelines in a 21-week process and then returned to revised Guidelines to the ECC for it to accept.  Had the ECC taken action on its own, Board action would not have been needed.  I blame the Board on this because it did not have a "clue" as to what was going on.  If you take the time to read the introduction to the Guidelines, you will find that it says that the ECC formulates.  The ECC reviewed and "approved" the Guidelines that we are now using. 

As a practical matter, the entire process is a joke when viewed in the context of the actual words in the DRs.

As a "practical matter" it's not a joke at all.  The Guidelines have a major impact on many things in OPA.  What needs to be done is for the ECC and management under its CPI (Compliance, Permits, and Inspection) Department to use good and consistent judgement in the enforcement of the Guidelines.  Not an easy task when we have members who disregard the rules for their personal convenience.