Looks like yet another Ocean Pines Association (OPA) committee, Architectural Review Committee (ARC), may have violated the Maryland HOA Act.

First some background:

No Ocean Pines Association committee impacts association members more than the Environmental Control Committee (ECC), as it is called in all the original Declarations of Restrictions (DRs) put in place by Boise Cascade when it created OPA. Later sections added to OPA reference the committee as ARC. OPA now just references ARC, regardless of what an association member's DRs may say.

To say ARC is controversial is a major understatement. Currently, ARC deals mainly what you can and can't do on your property. There is also the perhaps even more controversial Compliance, Permits and Inspections (CPI) department within OPA. It operates under the General Manager's office, with OPA employee staff inspectors.

CPI employees are the inspectors who send DR violation notices to association members. A difficult, mostly thankless, job, at best.  Association members need to treat CPI inspectors with respect. Problem? Contact the General Manager's office. Unfortunately, some association members even threaten inspectors with physical violence if the owner sees an inspector around their property. Disgusting.

CPI initiated violation notices not corrected in some time frame are forwarded to the General Manager's office, and then brought before the OPA Board of Directors for action at a public board meeting, possibly including a decision to take the offending association member to court. 

In addition to the DRs enforcement, there are Guidelines, prepared by ARC but needing approval of the Board. The Guidelines attempt to describe what is allowed under the DRs, including, in some cases, allowing blanket exceptions to things prohibited in the DRs. For example, the DRs forbid open burning of wood. The board approved Guidelines allowing open burning of wood because board members wanted to burn wood in firepits.

So, back to the HOA Act violation and the latest flap over the ARC desire to change the Guidelines to mandate every person selling their home in Ocean Pines may have to pay for a lot survey by a professional land surveyor prior to selling their property to obtain an OPA exit permit. Perhaps up to $2000.00.

On the morning of 7/21/2025 ARC met at 9:30 am. It was on the OPA calendar. Did not say meeting location. Turns out it was held in the small conference room off the Administration Building lobby. Eight or more real estate agents were waiting in the lobby. They are hopping mad over this, for some reason. The door to the meeting room was closed. 

ARC Committee board liaison Elaine Brady (God bless her for even taking the assignment) was in the lobby. Asked why the committee was meeting behind closed doors while people were waiting, she replied, "The committee is not meeting." Interesting. The ARC Committee is in an OPA meeting room behind closed doors, but the committee is not meeting.

You can't make this stuff up.

Another observation - ARC published no agenda for its meetings. ARC meetings are not recorded.

How about enforcement of sign regulations? ARC submitted revised Guidelines to the Board and the Board approved them back in April of 2024. Perhaps approved is not quite accurate. Actually, the Board rubber-stamped them. Unknowingly, the new guidelines allow only one sign on any lot in addition to a house number. Prior Guidelines allowed one sign per each OPA Board of Directors candidate during an OPA election.

Should it be one sign per board candidate? Perhaps a better policy is to just follow the DRs and allow NO board candidate signs. 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."

As a sidebar, related to an HOA Act violation by the Elections Committee, Hoffman, quite correctly, points out the committee likely violated the Maryland HOA Act when it went into closed session - with the support of board parliamentarian 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."

Returning to signs, Hoffman 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's liaison to the Elections (correction ARC - 7/26/2025) Committee then quite incorrectly tells Hoffman the Guidelines allow one sign per each candidate.

This is exactly the sort of misinformation, lack of understanding of our governing documents, nonsense, 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. Revisions are in the works, but will have no impact on current election.

The corker? Even if the one sign rule is enforced, or even if the Guidelines are changed to allow one sign per candidate, any sign regulation for board candidates is absolutely useless. Lot owners just play the timeline for enforcement. If OPA cannot immediately remove signs in violation, the election is over before any enforcement can happen! Happening right now on a lot on Ocean Parkway. Two candidate signs in violation of existing Guidelines.

Kinda like the ridiculous tree removal violation penalty. Cut down a large tree without a permit? Penalty? Replace with a two-inch tree. Two-inch trees may be cut down without a permit.

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.

Petty or not,  uniform enforcement is imperative for association members, or board members, or board candidates.

Finally, whew! Look at violations sent to the board for action at the last board meeting. Sample images below. With all the board talk about "beautification," and DR enforcement violations that destroy property values have obviously been around for years. ARC has actually approved fences that violate the DRs so a lot owner with a nice home doesn't have to constantly see the dump next door. That makes sense?

Only in OPA-Land.

Major revisions to the Guidelines are in the works.  A number of them are for the better, but some wording remains questionable in a few areas. The board needs to carefully study the changes, discuss them at length, and absolutely avoid rubber-stamping the proposed changes.
The ARC committee members are volunteers who are devoting time and energy to this project. However, these Guidelines are super important and impact EVERY association member.

Guidelines approvals have been rubber-stamped by boards in the past. That has to stop.

Image Title: DR Violation Image Uploaded: 7/21/2025
Image Info: DR Violation Image presented at OPA public board meeting.

A favorite. Backyard area miniature Versailles in the making.

Image Title: DR Violation Image Uploaded: 7/21/2025
Image Info: DR Violation Image presented at OPA public board meeting.

Image Title: DR Violation Image Uploaded: 7/21/2025
Image Info: DR Violation Image presented at OPA public board meeting.

Image Title: DR Violation Image Uploaded: 7/21/2025
Image Info: DR Violation Image presented at OPA public board meeting.