OPA president Larry Perrone was the first to say it. Other board members followed like lemmings. The cliff was not high. At twelve feet there were no deaths, just a few sprains, and bruised egos.

A Board of Directors trying to influence a referendum vote result with knee-jerk misinformation damages trust. Some say the board lied when it told association members a vote to limit board spending on a single capital improvement would mandate a referendum every year to approve bulkhead replacement projects. It may not have been a lie, but it was, without a doubt, one of the greatest misrepresentations ever made by a Board of Directors.

There are only two possible scenarios. The board intentionally misinformed association members or the board was ignorant of the facts. The latter is more likely. Either scenario is disturbing. 

The words were barely out of Perrone's mouth when some association members pointed out the bylaws permit projects like bulkheads and road paving to be done in phases without a referendum. The board ignored that part of the bylaws, would not even acknowledge it existed. The board attorney never addressed it.

However, another shoe dropped recently, perhaps even more damaging to the board's reputation over its misinformation about bulkheads. Retired CPA and highly respected former OPA Assistant Treasurer Gene Ringsdorf wrote that OPA cannot hold a referendum on capital spending for private bulkheads because OPA does not own private bulkheads and, as a result, has never capitalized those bulkheads. He notified the board of this before the ballots were mailed.

I asked Ringsdorf, "Is there any way OPA would be required to hold a full referendum on private bulkhead spending?"

He replied, "I cannot think of a situation involving the financing of these replacements wherein a 'full' referendum should be required..... To reiterate my point, since I read Mr. Perrone's opinion in the newspaper that private bulkhead replacements are subject to referendum limits, I wanted the board to be aware that such replacements are not capitalized projects, thus these expenditures should not be subject to the referendum limits 'on capitalized project costs'."

The board ignored Ringsdorf. Ballot packages are now arriving in the mailboxes of some 8000 or so association members eligible to vote. The misinformation about bulkheads remains in the board position statement. Yet many of those opposed to a board spending limit reduction say they "trust" the board to do the right thing.

Ringsdorf wrote, "I suspect now I know why the board has yet to reply to my message. I suspect that once they read it and verified the facts, they are now in a crisis mode to limit any damage this may cause. Perhaps redoing the referendum and ads are possible solutions."

Obviously, the board did not consider those possible solutions. Even today, the board continues to buy ads promoting a NO vote in two local newspapers. The ads contain the same bulkhead referendum misinformation.

There are even questions about whether or not the Board of Directors formally passed a motion to approve the board's position on the referendum or the full-page ads supporting the position.

Former OPA Director Marty Clarke takes a less accounting-professional approach. Clark said, "This is what happens when you give the car keys to a seven-year-old."

Another knowledgeable, respected source wrote, "If the Ocean Pines Association is not now capitalizing the bulkheads, there is little else to do but stop the referendum."

OPA General Manager John Viola confirmed OPA does not capitalize common bulkheads or private bulkheads.