Herring Resigns from HOA Board Over Remuda HOA vs Russells Lawsuit
ByNumerous sources are now telling me that Parker County, Texas Precinct 400 Chair, Marvin Herring, has been vocal in telling everyone who will listen that he has now resigned from the Remuda Ranch Estates Homeowners Association Board. Others are saying that they just won’t believe it until they see an official resignation announcement. I did try to contact Mr. Herring about his resignation from the board and was unable to reach him for comment. His resignation is taking place at a time when there is a great deal of pressure in Parker County to resolve the lawsuit brought on by the hoa against Johnnie and Clara Russell (vague updates on this lawsuit available at the bottom of this story).
During our research we were most surprised when we learned that Marvin’s wife, Peggy Herring, just happens to be the Parker County Democratic Party Precinct 400 Chair. Wouldn’t this kind of partnership make for an exciting conversation during your evening meal? We’ve also been told that Mr. Herring proudly voted in favor of a shooting ban ordinance in Parker County in subdivisions with 10 acres or less which put several gun instructors in the county out of business. The ordinance which passed in March of 2009, came after the members of the Remuda Ranch Estates Homeowners Association retaliated after they lost their case against Jack Cavenah who was one such instructor who had a shooting range in his backyard.
On March 13, 2009, the Weatherford Democrat reported this on the new ordinance impacting gun rights in Parker County,
“This is absolutely a personal vendetta that Orin Book and the homeowner’s association have against me,” Jack Cavenah said. “They’ve twisted this and made it sound like something it’s not, and all we want is both sides of the story. If they’d whipped us fair and square, that’d be one thing and I’d shut up. But this smells.”
Cavenah claims the court session wherein the ordinance was adopted, was held without giving both sides an opportunity to present their case.
“We had no idea that meeting was happening because the meetings usually happen on Mondays, and this one was on Friday,” he said. “I spoke to both the county judge and Commissioner Jim Webster the week before about this very issue, and neither of them mentioned the meeting to me. They didn’t mention it because they’d already made up their minds and they didn’t want us there telling our side of the story.”
When I spoke with Mr. Cavenah about about this particular issue, he stated,
I still remember what he (referring to Marvin Herring) stood up and said. He said, “This ain’t the wooly west anymore!”
You may recall a previous post where I revealed the hoa board members and Mr. Herring was listed as one of the board members. I will state that I have yet to find an official announcement of Mr. Herring in regards to his resignation from the Remuda Ranch Estates HOA. I have also learned that the Precinct 400 Chair position that Marvin Herring holds is also up for reelection. During my investigation of this story, I had a pleasant conversation with Lynette McCracken about the lawsuit and the many issues with the Remuda hoa. After she had provided me with the issues she was aware of, the conversation switched over to County issues regarding another lawsuit that had taken place where the hoa lost in court. More on this issue at a later date. Once I had a better understanding of the tangled web, I urged Lynette and her friends to get more involved in cleaning up the political landscape in Parker County, Texas. A couple of days after our conversation I learned that Lynette had decided to run for the Precinct 400 Chair position against Marvin Herring. I have to commend Mrs. McCracken for stepping up to run for the betterment of Parker County, Texas. Lynette is currently the Communications Representative for the Parker County Tea Party and a member of the Ft. Worth, Texas 912 Project Group.
Don’t hold your breath too long if you think this is all I have as I work to untangle this web of intimidation and corruption. I can assure you there is a lot more where this came from.
Update on the Russell lawsuit:
Since my reporting on Judge Johnson’s surprise and questionable appearance at a local Tea Party meeting, I have no new information on the Russell bond hearing. Clara Russell has also reported to me that their lawsuit, and everything that has been revealed because of it, has been an awakening and she is now making efforts to help clean things up by getting far more involved in their local politics.
I did reach out to Texas State Representative Phil King any comments he might have on this issue. Mr. King’s prompt response was, “It’s ridiculous. No HOA should be able to regulate religious or political speech. There is no excuse for what has been done to the Russell family. HOAs should focus on large community issues like well paved roads. This was a just a little yard sign.” During a conversation I had with Phil this evening he told me that we was focused on passing legislation that prevents homeowners associations from preventing the freedom of speech which is an important part of our Constitutional Rights.
I have made multiple attempts for a comment from Texas Governor Rick Perry and have yet to receive a response from him on this matter after two weeks.
**************
Please consider contributing to the Russell’s defense fund:
Clara Russell Defense Fund
PO Box 150471
Ft. Worth Texas 76108
The beginning chapters in this developing story:
- Activist Judge Rules Against Freedom of Speech in North Texas! (update #5 7-22-2011)
- Conflict of Interest Causing an Uprising in Parker County, Texas over Homeowners being Sued (Update #1)
- The Conflicts of Interest Keep Getting More Interesting when in Parker County, Texas
- Clara Russell Makes it onto Glenn Beck and Doug Giles to Tell Her Story
- Taking a Better Look into Conflicts of Interest in Parker County, Texas Regarding Russell Case
- Looking into the Board Members (Bullies) of the Remuda Ranch Estates Homeowners Association
- Couple Sued for “WAKE UP AMERICA” sign to appear on GBTV
- Update: Remuda Estates HOA vs Russells Case
Other stories of interest:
- Verdict is in on the ‘Wake Up America’ sign started by Talk Host Glenn Beck
- Update: Remuda Estates HOA vs Russells Case
- Couple Sued for “WAKE UP AMERICA” sign to appear on GBTV
- Looking into the Board Members (Bullies) of the Remuda Ranch Estates Homeowners Association (Update)
- The Conflicts of Interest Keep Getting More Interesting when in Parker County, Texas
By clicking the tip jar to the right to the right you can help to keep this site alive.
If (and that is a big if) Mr. Herring resigned then why hasn’t the HOA asked for people interested in taking his spot on the board? Have they replaced him already without input from the community? This occurred when one of the presidents resigned last year. A person who had not attended board meetings was there and when the president announced his resignation, this person said he would serve and was put on the board. It had been pre-arranged. Again, no input from the community.
I guess this messes up their gerrymandering of zone lines since Mr. Herring’s home was one of three homes that properties touched that were placed in three different zones to keep their little group together.
A reporter could spend years on the antics of this group. Thanks to the Russells for bringing it to the forefront.
Gerrymandering of zone lines? I am looking at the Remuda zones from 1997 and those 3 different zones you point out were already in place in 1997 – specifically the lots I know you are referring to: Zone 4/Herring, Zone 5/Carter, Zone 6/Wilson. Those zone lines haven’t changed since 1997 tho two of said lots changed owners since then. How can that be gerrymandering if only the property owners have changed but not the lines?
The idea of the board changing the zoning lines this time was to make the representation more even for all the zones (or so they say). How is it even to have three board members all be in different zones and have their property lines touch? It wasn’t right when they did it in 1997 and it still isn’t right now. As they were once told in court, just because you have done things wrong for years doesn’t make it right.
When people tried to volunteer for the zone lines committee, one volunteer told them the exact dates that they would be out of town. Amazing how they scheduled the meeting for that time. Another volunteer never got the notice on the time of the meeting and another got the times mixed up.
Of those three volunteers, not one ever got a phone call from the head of the committee to let them know that (a) the lines and decisions had already been made and the meeting was just to say ok, or (b) after the meeting what the decision was.
Another committe has been formed to rewrite the deed restrictions. When a person volunteered to be on that committe, she got a phone call from the head of the committee who said he had talked to his friends and they didn’t think she should be on the committee since the board had sued her. (not the Russells)
They only allow a select group of their friends to serve or have any input.
Sounds like Tom Psenak has joined the discussion. Welcome aboard.
Chicago politics has evidently moved to this Texas county.
This would be a good place for Tea Party members or 912ers to volunteer to be poll watchers.
We fully intend to do just that. This sounds too wacky to be true, but it isn’t. Idle hands are the devil’s workshop and these folks definetly need something to keep them busy.
How can things go so very wrong in so small a place? Activist judges, out of control HOAs, unresponsive county government, etc. ad infinitum. This is like a page out of George Orwell’s 1984, or Peyton Place without the sex. Does anyone in this little out of the way community have even a modicum of common sense? It certainly doesn’t seem so.
Why don’t they just choose up sides and have a rock fight, like good little Neanderthals? That would be one solution. Or rally around the apparent victims and contribute money to sue them out of existance? Looks like one resident has made a good start in that direction.
HOAs are SUPPOSED to be for the betterment of neighborhoods, not the evil entities they have all so evidently become. From California to New York, all you read about them is horror stories. Legislate them out of existance.
Unfortunately, with many HOAs they are run by people who got picked last for kickball when they were a kid and now use this as a power trip to feel important.
Parker County politics is very much a good ole boy system. It’s not always what is right but who you know and who you owe a favor to. The Tea Party here is starting to make a dent in that but it will take a lot of time. They been doing this for decades and the Tea Party has only been going a few years. It’s a slow process but one that will be well worth the effort.
This HOA is close to being out of money. They have filed so many law suits and used so much money on lawyers that they are down to their last little bit with two cases still pending. This HOA cannot charge dues according to its bylaws. The only money they get is through donations and gas lease money. The gas lease money is very small and basically pays to water the Women’s Club’s flowers each month. Before they had gas royalty money, they pretty much left everyone alone and we had a peaceful neighborhood. Once they run out of money, the lawsuits will stop. They won’t get enough donations to pay for such stupid lawsuits.
OBSERVATIONS ON JUDGE JOHNSON’S RULING
As an interested party in attendance during the JP Court hearings in the Russell case, I have made the following remarks and observations regarding the written document which comprises the Court’s Ruling:
1.) “Vacations” noted in this document were actually mandatory training sessions in out of town locations, paid for by the employer.
2.) Defendant’s attorney is working ‘pro bono’ (without pay)
3.) The Russell’s’ bank statements NEVER showed A $700 balance.
4.) Who is the judge to decide how the Russells will spend their income, and why does she think she has the right to decide if the things they purchase with their income are “necessities” or not?
5.) Should anyone have the right to expect another to sell personal property, cars, guns, fishing equipment, boat, jewelry, etc. to pay an excessive, punitive fine? Mrs. Johnson is a Judge, not GOD.
6.) The Russells made every effort to get the bond and so did their attorney, and tried to present a list of 5 contacts they had made which the Judge refused to accept. The FACT is this type of bond is required to be deposited in CASH, and in an amount DOUBLE the amount of the dollar figure of the damages. That figure would be over $14,000 in cash. How many of you folks have that kind of money at your immediate disposal? Bless you if you do, most of us are not that fortunate.
7.) I was in that courtroom the whole time and Clara Russell NEVER said that she didn’t know me. That assumption is utterly preposterous and blatantly false.
8.) The 912 organization is a non-profit, non-political organization. We have members of every political persuasion, including a few modern Muslims.
9.) Clara did say she could pay the court costs (about $225) but could not pay the $7K judgment and for certain not the $14K appeal bond, which required a cash deposit of that amount. As a matter of truth , the Judge based the damages on the HOA attorney’s statement that he had $7K in expenses invested in this case, and the HOA president confirmed that as a true statement, which it wasn’t. The amount he quoted was in response to a direct question to him from Judge Johnson. The minutes of a board meeting, published by the HOA just prior to the hearing, states the expenses for the Russell case to be in the neighborhood of $1350, not $7K. This figure is what Judge Johnson based the damage award on.
10.) Clara Russell testified that the told the HOA to hire an attorney AFTER she had been served with a law suit, not BEFORE. Both witnesses for the HOA testified that they had not laid eyes on Clara before the hearing nor had they talked to her on the phone. So how did they notify her she was in violation of the deed restrictions? Simple. They didn’t. She became aware of it when she was served a summons to appear.
11.) Judge Johnson implies that Clara’s testimony is not credible, but she bases that on her personal opinion, and offers no hard proof to the contrary.
12.) In the last paragraph of her ruling Judge Johnson suggests that the Russells get a loan or sell personal belongings to acquire the money to pay the judgment and the appeal bond. That would entail something like a second mortgage on their home to get that amount of money in cash. We are talking about upwards of $22,000 in cash. Is this just and reasonable? Not in this person’s eyes. Not by a long shot.
Jack Cavenah
He is using an old zone map that I have never seen. The zones were just
changed a month ago. The people he references: Carter and Wilson have not
lived here for at least 15 years. The three properties involved in the
gerrymandering are: Dougherty (was Carter), Herring (still Herring),
Henderson (was Wilson). Have no idea who gas man is. The people who were on
the “zone committee” who did the drawing of the new gerrymandered lines were
Shelby Dougherty’s husband and Rob Florance who is the husband of the woman
who was President of the Women’s Club at the time and had an interest in
keeping the 3 people (Dougherty, Herring, Henderson) in separate zones in
order to control who serves on the board. I have seen the new zone lines
because I was supposed to be allowed on the committee as was Terry, but we
never attended a meeting or were consulted about the drawing of lines after
we volunteered to serve. As far as I know, there was only one meeting after
Shelby told us we could be on the committee.. Terry had advised them she
would be out of town and unavailable. By the time I got to the meeting, it
was already over so I had no input. We volunteered to serve when we saw a
copy of the proposed lines and wanted to change them. We never got a chance
to. The gerrymandered zones were presented to the board and approved but
have not been published to the membership of the HOA. I am thinking we will
not see the map until the board (Kathy Chruscielski) gets around to
publishing a new HOA directory in May. BTW, Kathy is not secretary – Shelby
is. As of now, the membership does not know what zone they are in. The
directory will be published in May in order to coincide with the annual
meeting which means directors from each zone will be elected so the zone
lines at that time are important.
Our bylaws require the secretary to keep an up to date list of all residents
which inludes their address, lot and zone number. That has not been done.
When I was secretary for a short time in 2007, I did the list and published
the directory for that year. I have since then kept an updated list that we
use as the Neighborhood Watch and have provided it to HOA members, including
the board, on a regular basis. When the board finally publishes a new
directory, it will be the first one since 2007. The directory includes a
map of Remuda with names of owners noted on their lots. Jack has kept the
map updated.
Another item we have tried to impress upon our board is the fact that the
bylaws say everyone should be notified of meetings via email. (While the
bylaws say members shall be notified by follow up email, the bylaws were
written prior to the existence of email and we can find no record of a vote
to make a bylaw change to include email) Kathy Chruscielski started the
Remuda website and she moderates it and controls what is allowed to be
posted on it. In order to comply witht the bylaws the board would need
email addresses for all members. Some members we know of do not have email
addresses and the board has never made a list of email addresses for
members. The board utilizes Kathy’s Remuda website for notifications but
that list of webiste members only inlcudes about 90 of the 219 members of
the association. We have tried to impress upon the board that they are not
in compliance with the bylaws until they have email addresses for all
members or else mail them notices. The board, of course per Tommy, claims
they are in “full compliance” with the bylaws by using Kathy’s website list.
I have pointed out to them several times that Kathy’s list needs to be
scrubbed. A lot of the people no longer live in Remuda and are therefore no
longer members. Some members have an email address for every member of
their household on Kathy’s list which expands the number of members to over
200 but does not represent actual members of the HOA because the bylaws
provide for only one member per household. Thus, a large majority of
members do not receive these notices and the board is not in compliance.
[...] Herring Resigns from HOA Board Over Remuda HOA vs Russells Lawsuit [...]
Herring Resigns from HOA Board Over Remuda HOA vs Russells Lawsuit :: The 912 Project Fan Site – just great!
April 24, 2012
Weatherford Democrat
Letter to the Editor
512 Palo Pinto Street
Weatherford, TX 76086
In response to the April 5th article on Candidates Discuss issues.
Historically Parker County candidates have been honest and forthright competitors. Parker County is not used to big city smoke and mirror politics. But smoke and mirrors need clarification.
Trey Loftin says the governor appointed him to the position “based soley on my qualifications.” I know who the other attorneys were that applied for the position. Email and ask the governor for all of the applications. Then compare them for yourself. You may think a more appropriate answer is that Trey Loftin got the job because of who he knew not what he knows. SMOKE!
Loftin said, “When you think of the qualifications for the court, experience counts, this court this past year has handled the most serious or at least most of the most serious cases in the history of Parker County.” It may be true that Judge Loftin has attracted serious crime to Parker County, if so we need to vote him out. More likely than not his experience had nothing to do with serious crimes coming to court. SMOKE!
Judge Loftin said, “my court has also had tremendous success dealing with some of the most significant criminal cases in the history of the county. It did not happen on accident. It happens because of experience and it happens because of hard work.” He does not define success, but American Citizens have a constitutional right to a criminal trial. This does not happened because of his experience and hard work. It is the law of our land. SMOKE!
Judge Loftin wrote on the Parker County Blog: “Also, to be clear, when I became Judge, I had to take a large pay cut which I and my wife are happy to do”. But when asked to show his tax records to prove his great personal sacrifice, he refused. SMOKE!
Judge Loftin said he has had experience as a felony prosecutor in Tarrant County . When the Tarrant County Prosecutors office received an open records request concerning Judge Loftin’s record as a prosecutor, he wrote the Texas Attorney General asking that his records be kept from public scrutiny. SMOKE!
Don’t fall for political rhetoric or smoke and mirror politics. We have an important election next month in Parker County. I am asking you to consider voting early, vote often and vote against TREY LOFTIN.
Thank you,
Chuck Bayne
Marvin Herring has been going around saying that Trey Lofton supports him. Looks like birds of a feather may flock together.
A response to Mr. Cavenah’s ”Observations”
Sure, Muslims: get real…… Please provide names and contact info. I await your answer but will not hold my breath. Besides, what does this have to do with the Russell’s case?
1) There was no testimony that all of the vacations were required training. In fact the Russells testified that the trip to Hawaii was for a wedding and the groom’s family paid ALL expenses. Further they testified that all the other trips were fully paid by others. The only training trip was to Plano Tx. (about 45 miles from their home); not Cancun, Greece, or Hawaii.
2) Pro Bono is correct, but why?
3) The Russells never produced an official bank statement or any other certified accounting data. They “Testified’ to an amount but did not provided proof or information on any other accounts that they have had at the time.
4) Because they were claiming to be indigent and asking the State to release them from ordered cost and for the State to pay related court cost to move the case forward. When you ask the People to pay cost that you are responsible for the People have the right to know how you spend your money.
5) Yes, if you are wrong, when you brake the law and when you have been found guilty. You should be made to pay the price. That should be basic conservative thinking; you do the crime you do the time.
6) They testified that they made three phone calls. No “List of 5 contacts” was entered into evidence. The judge did not and could not have refused to accept any offer. In fact no such offer was made by the Russells. This is just nonsense. There was no testimony that the attorney assisted in the effort to find a bonding agent. The results that they testified too were that the bond would cost twice the judgment (normal in this type of case, this is just the free market working people) and that one was available at that cost. Well sorry that it is expensive, that’s the system and as I said before if you do the crime…….
7) Absolute lie. I and several others were there and are willing testify under oath that she said she “could not recall that name”. You can take the word and oath of ten people or one, you choose.
9) The question that was asked was “how much will this cost the HOA”. Not how much has been spent. But actually the question is mute. The judgment was not at the request of the HOA, (the HOA never asked for money from the Russells) it was not to “Repay” cost, it was a fine based on the number of days that Russells knowingly violated the restrictions. The judge could have fined them up to $200 a day but reduced that by significantly more than half. She did that because, as she stated, the larger amount would be excessive.
10) This is not true but plays no part in the eventual outcome of the case. After the case was filed the Russells cut off all contact with the Association and Members of the BOD.
It was In the second of three meetings, prior to filing the case, with the Russells where Board members tried to work out a fix to this situation, Clara Russell stated that the Board had better get an attorney.
Part Two, I testified that I was not a member of the Board at the time and therefore would not have had opportunity to visit with Russells. In fact I had never met the Russells before appearing in court on behalf of the Association. The other Board member that testified that day said that he had taken the Russells a copy of the Deed Restrictions shortly after they move into the community. As he was not on the Deed Restrictions committee he would not necessarily have reason to contact them concern this issue. Notification of the violation was by members of the DRC and the BOD. In fact one of these persons was their next door neighbor.
11) Right, she did not provide credible testimony. This in light of the testimony of several others, with evidence, that disproved many of her statements. For instance, she testified that she had not been approached by the Association. The Association’s logs of all contacts with Members include two contacts with dates, names and reason for the contact. Or the testimony of two people that they had met with Clara or Johnnie and discussed this issue prior to filing of the case.
12) If you do the crime…..Just real good conservative logic.
Tommy Stewart
Your comments remind me of Governor appointed judge Trey Loftin. He said he took a large cut in pay to be appointed judge. A position he applied for. But he refuses to provide his tax or financial records to prove his statement. I am like you and have a problem believing statements that could easily be proven but the person making the statement simply refuses to supply to proof. Early voting starts next week in Parker County. I ask you to vote early, vote often and vote against Trey Loftin.
11. Would that be the neighbor who was on the DRC and ran for the board illegally since he is not a member of the association as he is not a property owner?
Back to Marvin Herring who is running for re-election for REPUBLICAN precinct chair.
Let’s look at who is backing Mr. Herring
1. TOMMY STEWART – Occupy Dallas Protester/ proud democrat
2. Kathy Chruchelski – environmentalist
3. Mary Herring – DEMOCRAT chair of the precinct Marvin is in.
4. Several current and former board members of Remuda HOA that wasted thousands of dollars on lawsuits that could have been used to improve the community.
Birds of a feather flock together and these birds do not represent the ideas of the Republican Party.