You say that as if it is a matter of fact, but perhaps you just did not see it happen. Why would you make such a dogmatic statement?

I just contacted OPA board member Steve Jacobs. Based on your public statement it never happened, Jacobs confirmed that someone threw a pencil at him at the conclusion of the closed meeting, and that is certainly not leaking "confidential board information" or "attorney-client privileged communications" 

Readers should understand more generally that your unconfirmed reports of what someone else said to someone else do not become confirmed by the lack of a correction from involved Board members, as you seem to suggest. Third, your opinion is just your opinion, based on what you know and don't know, and think you know.

I rely on what I believe are reliable sources, despite your obvious attempt to suggest otherwise.

Readers may believe you or my ORIGINAL reporting as now directly confirmed by the director involved.

Lastly, the matter of concern at that time was not "leaks" as to what may have occurred in a closed session (although that should generally not occur, in my view); the concern was disclosure of attorney-client privileged communications. There is a rather significant difference between those two things, at least to me.

I would agree on the distinction.

However, Steve Jacobs was the individual directly accused by the other six board members, and apparently directly by you. Shameful.

In my view, based on what I believe transpired, the closed session against Jacobs was a travesty. There was no proof Jacobs released any attorney-client privileged communications to anyone.

Finally, in my opinion, OPA corporate counsel should not be addressing this sort of an issue without specific permission of the Board of Directors. If the board as an entity desires to make a public statement about whether someone threw a pencil at Jacobs in a closed session, let the board do so. It is not your position to do so.

That said, while I appreciate your participation here, I am not gonna sit back and simply accept every opinion you offer on my commentaries as fact.

As an aside, a great deal about the closed meeting was leaked by Rick Farr to Tom Stauss and published in the Ocean Pines Progress. I recall no concern expressed publicly by you or other majority board members over Farr's disclosure of attorney-client privileged communications, closed meeting info, or whatever name is appropriate, after they improperly raked Jacobs over the coals.