Farr’s candidacy will turn on how judge sees property ownership by family trust

By Greg Ellison

(Aug. 12, 2021) The Ocean Pines Board of Directors election entered unchartered waters on Tuesday when Worcester County Circuit Court Judge Beau Oglesby issued a temporary restraining order to stay the election until after a hearing on whether disqualified board candidate Rick Farr is a property owner.

This development followed a special board meeting on Monday where a 3-2-1 vote rejected a motion from Director Doug Parks to rescind the election and issue new ballots.

Farr retained attorney Bruce Bright to file suit after the board voted in closed session last Friday to disqualify his candidacy because his home is owned by a trust, and not  by him personally.

 “We just filed the case yesterday,” he said Tuesday. “We’re hoping for quick action from the court.”

The 2021 board election ballot deadline had been set for Wednesday of this week, with the Ocean Pines Elections Committee originally scheduled to count votes on Friday.

Bright said his client  sought the temporary restraining order to put the election on hold while a determination on Farr’s property ownership status is reached.

“It’s really at the judge’s discretion as to how to get to an outcome,” he said.  

“If the votes are counted and the results certified, then it’s more difficult to unwind the situation,” he said. “Although, it can still be unwound.”

Among the actions the judge might take, according to Bright, is that he could schedule a court hearing or hold a telephone conference with involved parties.

Despite being certified as an eligible candidate at the start of the election by board secretary Camilla Rogers, that decision was reversed last Friday after an anonymous tipster brought Farr’s property ownership into question.

Under association bylaws, board candidates are required to be an owner of record for Pines property on Jan. 1 of the election year.

As of that date, Farr was a successor trustee and a beneficiary of a family trust, but was not the trustee. Under Maryland law, the trustee manages the trust and holds legal title to the property, while beneficiaries of a trust have what is known as equitable ownership.

“It’s important for everybody to understand that my client at all times has acted in good faith and believes himself to be eligible to run for the position and hold a board position,” he said. “The board has a different view, but that’s why the matter is in court.”

Another matter of contention Bright’s filing noted was that the board voted in closed session last Friday to continue the election despite the last-second disqualification of Farr.

“What some of the board members say happen, is that the secretary made a decision to disqualify Mr. Farr, but then then a motion was made to proceed in the fashion that they decided,” he said. “That was voted upon and approved by the full board in closed session.

“That’s in violation of statutes governing what can happen and what can be discussed in closed session,” he said.

Bright said the directors could have had had discussions with counsel in closed session, but then should have reconvened in open session to conduct the rest of its business.

Bright also took issue with Director Frank Daly, who seeking re-election, participating in the closed session meeting last Friday.

“I don’t believe anybody knows at this point whether the incumbent voted on the motion that was made,” he said.

Speaking on Tuesday, Bright said his client is yearning for a fast resolution.

“It remains to be seen what the court will do, but we are hoping that the court will act quickly in light of the timing,” he said.