Allow me to correct your erroneous statement above saying I referred to the "compromise" as "policy."  I do not recall ever saying it was a board motion to create a policy.

In fact, I wrote the exact opposite of what you accuse me of saying above: "While the board never voted on a definitive, formal policy, Daly said the board 'compromise' allowed board members at that time to accept free food and booze at MOC establishments outside Ocean Pines but not at the MOC-managed facilities owned by OPA."

I wrote, based on direct interviews with two of the directors participating in that closed meeting, that they discussed the issue of directors receiving free food and booze from Matt Ortt Companies and voted on what both of those directors described to me as a "compromise" proposed by Frank Daly.

I would speculate that the "compromise" vote, or agreement, or however anyone chooses to characterize it, as clearly recalled and described by these two directors, each taking a different position on the issue, is never mentioned in the minutes of that meeting. But you say there are no minutes of closed meetings? Is that really the case?

As for your suggestion the "compromise" agreement reported directly to me by Daly and Perrone is no more than "hearsay," I'm not sure how you are defining hearsay. It seems to me the generally accepted definition of hearsay is something an individual says was stated by another party who is not present, thus impossible to establish credibility. I was not given hearsay by those two directors. They each, in separate interviews, described to me what transpired during that meeting. I have no reason to believe both of these former directors are lying.

I will close by saying (to any readers of your off-base post) that the RFP process, spearheaded by General Manager John Viola, is being conducted professionally and with full intention to objectively review and consider all RFP submissions, and to make considered and careful decisions in that regard that will further the best interests of OPA and its members. I know that GM Viola is working hard, with the support of the Board, to carry out this RFP process as professionally as possible. 

On that, we are in agreement.

As usual, your participation here is greatly appreciated.

PS - Out of curiosity, is there that much similar concern over the Stauss piece in the Progress where his headline asks, "Inside track for Matt Ortt Companies?"

And: "There is speculation in the community that MOC has the inside track on a new contract"

And: "Former OPA president Rick Farr, during his campaign for reelection made it clear that he supported a contract extension for MOC..."

And: "Newly elected as OPA vice president, Farr has not publicly deviated from his comments that make it clear he's an MOC supporter."

And: "In an article in the September edition of the Progress, new OPA president Stuart Lakernick says that 'We (the directors) have heard nothing but rave reviews of his [Matt Ortt] management of all three of our food outlets. We want to continue that process and that relationship.'"

Surely these comments from OPA directors, more or less acting as cheerleaders for MOC, were not appropriate as the MOC contract approached expiration, a contract that would require board members to cast a vote on the recipient.

Perhaps some good advice to board members would be to stop giving what generally amounts to self-serving interviews to the local press. "No comment" should be said more often.

As you pointed out, while none of those 2020 board members are currently on the board, one was appointed by this board to two very responsible positions, one of those charged with oversight/review of the MOC budget who is speaking out publicly at committee meetings as another cheerleader for MOC.

Finally, I agree with Rick Farr's observation that Steve Lind's clear implication that current board members were taking free food and booze from MOC was "outrageous." However, the vote by all directors except Horn and Perrone to approve that "compromise" back in March 2020 was equally, if not more, outrageous than the comments made by Lind.

Finally, finally, ask yourself why that 2020 OPA Board of Directors ever even discussed the issue of board members receiving free food and booze from MOC. The issue did not exist in a vaccum.