One never knows how courts will react, but OPA looks to be on shaky ground. According to petitioner attorney Bright, the board failed to even comply with bylaws requirements in its handling of the petition submitted with over 800 verified signatures of association members. 

Joe  Thanks for posting this message.  For me these two paragraphs are the essence of the case. 

Plus another incredible development:  What kind of naive board members do we have  --  adding further inflammatory comments at a public meeting???  Disrespecting a court case further impugns their motives.  Publicly disrespecting the process is extremely unwise.  Seems additional evidence against the BOD, failing its duty . . ."to act honestly and in good faith . . ."   And the suit alleges  "Defendants have breached those duties . . .      

Hoping the court will order that the referendum should go forward.  I see little or no signs that common sense will prevail on this BOD.  Too bad that the court is unlikely to assess $$$ as a fine or damages against a board member for arrogance.   

Have they never heard about "no comment while the case is pending"????  Kinda poor judgement, arrogance, or insolence by a board guy.

PS  Seems another reason for OP to get new counsel. Perhaps a missing piece of advice, about avoiding commentary.  Nix that western shore counsel, in favor of a local firm.

Tom