Sharon Marsh-Wyly

Editor's note: This is a continuation of Ms. Marsh-Wyly's perspective on her battle royale with East Dallas Conservation Nazis.

This is cathartic! For 3 years, I've read so-called accounts of our story as told by Preservation Dallas (PD) and had to bite my lip and endure it.

In my previous post, I didn't even get to what happened when then Councilwoman Valetta Forsythe-Lill called many major law firms in town leaving messages that she was seeking advice and representation for Preservation Dallas about Vic and me. So naive were we that we didn't realize that her intent was what's known in legalese as "tainting", so the firms she called had an automatic conflict of interest when we latter called those same law firms seeking representation,

I also didn't get to the part where their so-called foundation witness testified he'd spent long hours with Vic inspecting the house and writing a favorable report (which was backdated). However, he insisted the person in court (my husband) was not Vic Wyly. The judge was not impressed. Truthfully, I don't think it even occurred to PD or Swiss Ave Historic District (SAHD) people that their guy was lying until our attorney pointed to Vic and asked "is this the man you met with?". The poor slob confidently replied, "No, I've never met him before."

Then, there's their other preservation window restorer who'd given us the bad news about the costs to restore the windows who walked out of court and refused to testify against us. PD had said Vic misquoted him about the high cost. The window restorer declined to contradict Vic's testimony, much to PD's chagrin.

Or, about how we offered to restore the house and sell it back to PD at cost if they did for us what they're doing for the new owner -- raise donations for the repair costs above what we could borrow. This would have netted us no profit and actually costs us in free labor and time lost on other projects, but it might have been fun and we were willing to compromise on that route if they helped.

I'm interested in hearing more about the female attorney who some Bryan Parkway people say broke out windows of the house on my instructions. I never instructed anyone to demolish the house other than the demolition company. I did indeed give permission for friends to assist in the demolition and/or remove from the house anything they wanted for their own AFTER the Court issued its Final Judgment and TRO. Since the doors don't open anymore, (the house has shifted and sunken more in the 3 years), keys are useless and the demolition company would have had to kick in the doors and break windows. A fact, I guess is lost on some people.

Again, this was only AFTER the court had issued it's Final Judgment and the Temporary Restraining Order had been dissolved and the valid Demolition Permit renewed -- all verified by the police. So her breaking windows on that day was perfectly legal. I'm once again dismayed at Bryan Parkway People not getting those easy-to-ascertain facts.

I wonder do they not know about the neighbor plaintiff who did the same thing himself in the wee hours of the morning apparently disgusted with the fact that the state of our house was interfering with him selling his own? No, he didn't have our permission, consent or prior knowledge. Yes, the TRO WAS still in place and this was BEFORE we won the Final Judgment. I won't write publicly about that either. Just FYI. Fair's fair.

The man had a lapse in reasoning at having shot himself in the foot. We chose to turn the other cheek again.

You were asked by a Bryan Parkway Resident "what's wrong with wanting at least one block in SAHD to remain intact."

I would say "nothing at all", but I question why, as a resident of that same block, did he not insist that steps be taken years ago when it could have mattered to prevent the demolition by neglect?

I think I know the answer, and it's one I myself would honestly give in this situation: I wouldn't have wanted to embarrass a friend and neighbor, I would have grumbled about it, but shrugged it off that it wasn't my problem, that it would take care of itself someday.

Never could he have known it would have come to this without his and other district homeowners being proactive. I understand some Bryan Parkway residents did pitch in and physically help at stages to assist the previous owner fix up the house.

Why was it later MY fault that their band aids didn't hold?

Why did the intense animosity over restoring the structure only come to a head once the previous owners were out of the picture?

Why weren't the same allowances were made in my intense defense of my property rights?

Jim Schutze wrote on The Dallas Observer's UnFair Park Restoration Hard Way that "Both sides went way over the line." I wish I HAD gone over the line...way over. But Vic and I in our stupidity at first thought PD had an honest complaint about the process and they wanted answers. Lest Jim forget or more probably doesn't know, it was Vic and I who voluntarily agreed on 2 different occasions to delay exercising our right to demolish to allow PD, et al, time to mount a different appeal or argument when we had the legal right to demolish.

I regret that in hindsight, because now I realize it was a smoke screen. But, Jim Schutze was not privy to the conversations where their pleaded with us to give them time to screw us, appealing to our better nature. We acquiesced. I could kick myself each time later.

Whenever the tables were turned, they threw us under the bus. They then held press conferences to say what bad, horns-growing-out-of-our-heads people we were, (Plano-Drano, indeed), knowing we would suck up their latest gut-punch and decline to comment until after the final judgment.

They tore down No Trespassing Signs and caution tape to trespass on our property taking photographs to present against us, posting a fake SAHD Homeowners Association online that change to true wording to read membership and access to meetings is limited to people who LIVE in the district. Only years later did we discover that membership and access to meetings is open to anyone who OWNS in the district. They didn't want us showing up and telling truths that would go against the mushroom policy they hold toward their own neighbors.