Election bylaw change: you must be this tall ___ to run for a seat on the Ocean Pines Association Board of Directors.

As ridiculous and smart-alecky as that is, it nevertheless reflects the nature of the effort by members of the OPA board to narrow the pool of possible candidates by creating a package of especially restrictive election regulations.

Undoubtedly, some of these recommended rule changes are an after-the-fact backhand to the face of Circuit Court Judge Sidney Campen, who early this year ruled against the board in a lawsuit challenging the majority’s attempt to block a candidate from outside their ruling clique.

The plaintiff in the case, Rick Farr, was elected as a result of the court’s decision, but the bylaws revisions proposed by Director Frank Daly, who ran against Farr in last year’s race, would prevent that from ever happening again.

Anyone who owns property through a corporation, as Farr does, would no longer be eligible to run. Instead, a candidate’s name must be on the deed recorded with the county.

Another particularly conspicuous revision to the bylaws offered by Daly targeted another of his challengers in the last election by attempting to disqualify him, (and anyone else, one would presume) because of his spouse’s legal difficulties. The OPA’s attorney apparently quashed that one.

Meanwhile, other amendments up for consideration would make it more difficult to run for the OPA board than it would be for Congress.

By calling for a greatly extended period of residency or reducing that requirement via a year of service on an OPA advisory committee, these recommended changes either suppose that serving the people of Ocean Pines is more difficult than, say, serving in the U.S. Senate, or they are purposely exclusionary for reasons unknown or unspoken.

As difficult as it is to get good people to run for the board, tightening the rules to this degree would not benefit the community, leaving open to speculation whether this is an act of spite or the product of some other unknown agenda.