1/ Marty, I believe, is focused on the distinction between CPI identifying violations, notifying the property owners, and seeking compliance, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the Board finding a continuing violation to exist for purposes of OPA actually taking action against an owner. Not until the Board makes that finding, can any action be taken against an owner's voting or amenity rights, or against an owner in Court. The latter is what Marty is focused on, differently than the mere identifying of a violation and sending of a notice letter seeking compliance.

2/ What the numbers clearly show is how effective CPI is at gaining compliance without the need for Board action. This is because thankfully, most members understand and have respect for the process and their DR-based obligations, which are contractual; and also because, despite what gets published by some, CPI does a very effective job of operationally working with members to achieve compliance.

3/ As for leaves, I would just encourage folks to have a look at the photos of cited properties, and they will see that it's not "some leaves," but rather, a real property maintenance issue, when properties are cited for leaf issues.

4/ Lastly, I am baffled by your remark that Steve Jacobs has been subject to "harassment and ridicule" by other members of the Board. I've never witnessed that, at all, sitting in a lot of Board meetings and otherwise being pretty close to the action. And honestly, I would be pretty surprised if Steve would characterize his Board interactions that way. You may certainly endorse as you see fit, but that characterization in my view needed some correction.