Well, the pollinator flowers are not a violation of the current Guideline, but more than one board candidate sign is a violation of the Guidelines as approved by the Board of Directors in April 2024. You, and Stuart and Monica and Steve, and John, and Rick, and Elaine likely voted to approve those Guidelines. 

The Guidelines you approved allow only ONE sign of any kind in addition to the house number.

At one time it was one sign per board candidate. It should be one sign per board candidate. Board members pay too little attention to the details, and the devil is always in the details.

Then we have the Cindy Hoffman July 2025 Ocean Pines Progress article titled "Confusion reigns during Elections Committee meeting."

Hoffman, quite correctly, points out the committee likely violated the Maryland HOA Act when it went into closed session, with the support of board parlimentarian Doug Parks! Interviewed by Hoffman after the meeting, Parks dissembled. Parks did not fool Hoffman. She wrote that Parks' agreement with Ransdell "could be interpreted as Parks supporting Ransdell’s move to closed session in violation of the HOA Act." 

She also wrote, "Additionally, a discussion on campaign signage left candidates confused. While the rules advise one sign per lot, Ransdell (committee chair)  suggested allowing one per candidate per lot. In a follow-up email, he said, 'As for sign regulations, I would suggest you contact the ARC or CPI folks. The Elections Committee does not set or enforce signage.'"

OPA Director and liaison to the Elections Committee Elaine Brady then quite incorrectly tells Hoffman the Guidelines allow one sign per each candidate.

This is exacrly the sort of nonesense, hypocrisy, double standard, or whatever, that makes many association members angry about Guidelines enforcement. 

Do as we say, not as we do?

Sadly, the board was well aware of this issue and had the time to change the Guidelines to reflect allowing one sign per each candidate. It refused to do so.

All petty stuff? Perhaps so. However, association members facing what they may see as petty violations expect the petty stuff to be enforced uniformly, not ignored when it benefits board members or board candidates.

Yours in uniformly enforced pettiness for association members and board members,

Joe