Richard looked toward Linda. Linda looked down at the papers on the table.
"We've maintained the area for years," Richard said.
"That wasn't my question," Susan replied, still calm.
I didn't need to interrupt. I moved to the next document and explained the separate fire restrictions. I told the board about calling the appropriate city and fire offices and checking the site for both access and safety conditions. Then I passed Susan the police incident information, which recorded that responding officers had found no apparent violation after reviewing the available property and fire materials.
Susan read silently for a moment. "The officers didn't issue a citation or warning?"
"No."
"And they checked the location?"
"They did."
Richard interjected. "We're not relitigating a property-line dispute. The complaint is about Mark's conduct."
"I agree that conduct is the issue," I said. "But the conduct has to be understood in context. I was warned not to grill on association property. I didn't. That matters when deciding whether asking for proof was harassment."
I looked toward Linda. "You also said I threatened you."
"I felt threatened," she answered.
"What words did I use?"
"Your tone was aggressive."
"What words?"
Richard raised his hand again. "Mark, you can present your evidence without cross-examining Linda."
"Fair enough." I held up my phone. "I recorded the interaction. I'd like to play the sections concerning the alleged monitoring of our unit and the claimed threat."
Linda sat upright. "I object."
Susan turned toward her. "On what basis?"
"He recorded me to humiliate me."
"That describes why you dislike the recording," Susan said. "It doesn't tell us whether it accurately shows what was said."
Richard consulted his notes. "Please keep it to the relevant portion."
"I will."
I connected the phone to the small speaker used for meeting presentations and checked the volume. My hands were steady, but I was conscious of Emily sitting beside me with the document accusing her household of threatening behavior. I didn't want to triumph over Linda. I wanted the board to hear the exchange in the same ordinary voices it had originally occurred in.
Linda's recorded voice filled the room: "I've been watching your unit since the dog incident."
Several heads turned. Then came the statement about knowing exactly which unit was ours and waiting for us to make a mistake that could be used. My own voice asked whether she was specifically looking for violations from our household. The recording played her answer about residents who refused to cooperate eventually making mistakes.
I let the audio continue to the next exchange. "Do you do that with every resident?" I asked on the recording.
"I do it with residents who need extra attention."
"Like me?"
"Exactly."
I paused it. The room felt smaller than it had when Linda first began speaking. People were looking at each other, not at the board table. A man along the back wall folded his arms; a woman near the door whispered something I couldn't hear. Susan put down her pen and looked directly at Linda.
"What does extra attention mean?" she asked.
Linda crossed her arms. "It means residents who repeatedly violate community rules require closer oversight."