Who approved the pond?

The check and the ground

On July 17, 2012, two Georgetown Affordable Housing board members, Marnita Payton and Aaron Mason, signed a check to an excavator for work on a fish pond at Zion Hill. The check drew on the nonprofit’s account. Chairwoman Tracie Hoffman later told the Georgetown News-Graphic that she could find no minutes recording approval of the work. The reporter described the check. A copy of it and the board’s complete minute book were unavailable for this review.

Executive director Clyde Beverly II said the previous board had voted to pursue a relationship with Kentucky State University. University officials told the newspaper their involvement ended when the proposed site failed to receive USDA approval. A USDA liaison said the site would not hold water. Beverly described the work as reimbursable through county extension. The county extension agent recalled discussing a community garden with him and said he had never mentioned a fish pond.

Who authorized excavation at that site after technical advisers raised objections? A signed agreement, a board vote naming the site, or a reimbursement voucher could answer it. The coverage reviewed identifies none of those documents. In his published response, Beverly welcomed an investigation and said he was never a bank signatory.

September 24, 2013 · excavation report · October 5, 2013 · Beverly’s signed response

Two corporations dissolved on the same day

Kentucky’s filing history adds an important date. On September 11, 2012, the state administratively dissolved both Georgetown Affordable Housing Inc. and Zion Hill Missionary Baptist Church Inc. The housing nonprofit’s corporate life continued. The state reinstated it October 31, shortly after the board suspended Beverly’s contract. It filed annual reports in June 2013 and June 2014. A second administrative dissolution took effect September 12, 2015.

2012 dissolution · 2012 reinstatement certificate · Housing nonprofit’s filing history · 2015 dissolution

The church has its own Kentucky organization number, 0505835. The Secretary of State lists Beverly as president. The following April, Commonwealth Land Title Insurance sought $81,033 and liquidation of the church’s assets over mechanics’ liens. The newspaper identified the church as the defendant. Its corporate filing and the reported complaint establish neither a judgment against Beverly personally nor a foreclosure sale of property he owned.

Church filing and officer list · Church dissolution · April 30, 2013 · complaint report

Harmony Village was already open

In his October 2013 letter, Beverly claimed Georgetown Affordable Housing had been entitled to $390,000 in co-developer fees. The newspaper’s account of his lawsuit gave the figure as $396,000 and dated the claimed entitlement to 2008. Both figures came from Beverly’s side of the dispute. No agreement or closing statement reviewed here establishes the amount owed or who received it.

Federal housing data independently dates the project. HUD lists Harmony Village Apartments as Kentucky project KY-07-012, with a 2007 tax-credit allocation and 34 low-income units placed in service in 2009. Beverly became the nonprofit’s executive director in October 2011. His accusation concerned a transaction he said predated his appointment. A fee agreement, closing ledger and disbursement records would be needed to trace a developer fee.

HUD project record · KYA20090050 · Executive appointment · Beverly’s letter · Account of complaint

Two courts, two cases

The church complaint went to Scott Circuit Court in April 2013. Beverly filed his own suit in Fayette Circuit Court in June. He alleged retaliation, wrongful termination and breach of contract after the board suspended his five-year employment agreement. His lawyer had earlier sought a $300,000 settlement. The June filing sought damages without naming a total, according to the October account.

In December, defense counsel argued that the housing authority had immunity and that whistleblower protections did not cover it. Beverly’s lawyer expressed no objection to dismissing specified claims against three individuals and disputed immunity for the authority. The last report reviewed described pending motions. No final order in either case was located in this review.

February settlement demand · December filings and response

For the employment case, the Fayette docket, any transfer order and the final disposition would resolve what happened after those motions. For the church case, the Scott docket and any signed sale order or confirmation would establish what happened to the property.

Fayette Circuit Civil Division · Scott Circuit Court clerk