Well, I am the civilian in this discussion but perhaps you can help me understand.

The judge ruled that the elected OPA Board of Directors could not ban an association member in good standing from an amenity. If the board lacks this authority, how can employees or contractors of OPA exercise such authority, given the current state of the governing documents, whether the ban is for an hour, a week, or 90 days? How can employees at our business venues know if any individual is a member in good standing since that now seems to be a key issue in any action initiated against patrons by an employee or employee of a contractor supervised by the GM?

The case just isn't about what you seem to want to make it about. As far as whether the Board or the GM could take action in the future as to, for example, some repeat offender/problem OPA member (Tom isn't in that category), I think there are ways for that to occur properly, but it's not my job to map that out.

Fair enough. However, the issue of how OPA can "properly" take action in the future to ban any individual doing, for example, what was reported in the eyewitness report, while not your job, is now THE issue.