If there is any OPA Committee requiring transparency, it is the Elections Committee.

Unfortunately, it could be the least transparent committee, perhaps to the extent of violating the Maryland HOA Act. The last committee meeting minutes on the OPA website are from September 2024. Those minutes are interesting, stating: "Due to facility issues, the Election Committee was unable to hold our regularly scheduled meeting. Committee members who were present received copies of last year’s ballot materials for review. Changes will be discussed at our next meeting."

Regularly scheduled meeting? There are no more recent committee meeting minutes since September 2024. However, the Elections Committee has been meeting. It must be meeting. The Committee has received bids from five vendors to handle the OPA Board of Directors election process. We know this, not because the Elections Committee or OPA announced the information, rather because of reporting in the Ocean Pines Progress, apparently from an unnamed source. Neither the Elections Committee nor the Ocean Pines Association announced the bidding information publicly.

In recent years, the Elections Committee ignored the HOA Act or OPA's own governing documents on a number of occasions. The Board of Directors needs to step in and make changes. The Elections Committee is too important for the Board of Directors to allow such laissez-faire operation.

Transparency rarely causes problems; lack of transparency frequently causes problems.

Based on the Progress reporting, it looks like Ace Printing and Mailing of Berlin has an excellent chance of handling the OPA board election this year. It might be good to again have a local contractor handle the election. Ace Printing handled OPA elections for many years without much controversy. Things went south fast after the board voted some years ago to also include Internet voting, hiring out of state contractors, and resultant issues every year since.

The Ace bid of $18,685 is much lower than MK Solutions, the company that handled the election last year. MK Solutions this year bid $31,539 - the highest bid received. Either they figured they were a shoo-in, based on public statements from the Elections Committee last year, and went for the gold, or did not want the job again.

A company named Voatz was in third place with a bid of $22,000 and they, like Ace, complied with the RFP requirements.

A low bid of just under $10,000 from YesElections in New York did not comply with the RFP requirements.

Contrary to what many believe, the OPA Governing Documents provide that the Elections Committee approve the independent contractor to handle the election process, not the Board of Directors. After Committee approval, the contract is to be signed by the General Manager or the board president.

Association members can only speculate on when the Elections Committee will tell the membership what is going on.

To repeat: Transparency rarely causes problems; lack of transparency frequently causes problems.