This is my response to an email that Joe sent to Arco who had sent an email to Joe asking if everything she was reading on the internet about him and Heights Presbyterian Church was true.

> One project is 200 yards from the church and the other is less than a mile. Both projects are almost 30 years old. One of the conspirators in this matter is the owner of the professional management company who does not have very positive reputation in the business community.

> There is always a long list of people who need low rent retirement facilities so this is meaningless.

> Houston is a very large city. This area is in a depressed Black area where prostitution is rampant. There have been several articles on the news lately about trying to stamp out this problem in this particular subdivision known as the Independence Heights. The problem is that there are no grocery stores, chain stores, movie theaters, parks or any other such facilities in this area. The seniors in this project will most likely be living behind fence and will not be able to leave unless they take a bus provided by the facility. They would not dare walk the streets in this area alone. And they would literally be taking their lives in their hands if they tried it at night.

> The project was never approved by the session. The session meeting that Joe says approved the Independence Heights Project was held a year after Joe made the commitment to the project. This meeting was on April 21, 2002, but the obligation was on May 18, 2001.

> Not exactly. I set up a meeting with Joe and four others for April 19, 2002. I set this meeting up sometime around April 12, 2002. After I set up the meeting, Joe announced in the church bulletin on April 14, 2002, that there would be a special session meeting on April 21, 2002, to which only session members were invited. I met with Joe and company on April 19, 2002, and was told exactly what I was concerned about and that was that the church has an unlimited liability for 40 years to the HUD project. Of course these individuals said that the church would never have to pay any money. But HUD requires that a non-profit organization sponsor these projects and you know the sponsors must have the financial ability to cover the losses. You have to qualify to sponsor these projects.

I did not realize on the 19^th that Joe had set up a meeting to try to go through with the project for the 21^st. It was my understanding that he was going to supply all the documents regarding the project to me the following week so that I could report back to my mother, a trustee, and she could inform others who were looking to her for report. An illegal meeting of the session was held on April 21^st and Joe alleges that meeting authorized the project. It did not. When I found out that Joe had blindsided me, I filed suit on April 22, 2002. I realized that the whole meeting on the 19^th was a sham and that because I was closing in on his mischief, he had to move quickly to do his dirty work.

> Joe has the church records at this home and it was convenient for him to destroy the records that showed that sometime in the 1980’s that I again became a member. I was baptized at Heights Church and my grandparents and other family members obligated themselves to build the sanctuary in 1952. My mother has been a member for 56 out of the last 60 years of her life.

> In court, Joe admitted that he was a liar and that he had tried to commit the church to the Independence Heights project without the approval of the session, the congregation or the Presbytery. Also, his salary exceeds the contributions coming into the church. He has also refused to minister the sick and dying at the church. Joe must go, that is true.

> The session voted the prior minister out after two years.

> Not likely. There is a significant part of $700,000 that is unaccounted for over the last five years since Joe became the minister. I requested the court to appoint an auditor but the Presbytery stepped in and the court determined to give them time to check into matter.

In addition, a complaint has been filed with HUD and the Inspector General of the U S to investigate the project. It may take years, but there is a possibility that Joe and some of his company may be indicted.

> True I did attend a session meeting in October 2002 to stop Joe from creating more mischief and after which the session began to meet off premises in people’s homes to prevent my attendance. The question is why all session meetings since April 2002, are now executive meetings where the congregation is barred.

And the bigger question is if this is such a simple matter, then why hasn’t Joe just told everyone the truth. The interesting thing is that Joe has said more in this email than he has told the congregation in the last two years.

I did step up to the pulpit about two months ago and rebuked Joe when he told the congregation that he was prohibiting their meeting after worship service to discuss his bad acts. I stepped up, said my piece and sat down. The informal meeting proceeded and about five other meetings were held after service subsequent to that one. By the way, that meeting was held when Joe canceled the annual congregation meeting. Two Sundays were skipped to allow the administrative commission to talk to the members of the congregation. The administrative commission delivered their interim report last Sunday and there will be another informal meeting this Sunday because it has become obvious that the administrative commission is simply there to endorse Joe‘s bad acts.

> The administrative commission was illegally formed after Joe secretly took 13 of his disciples to a Presbytery meeting and lied about the happenings at HPC. The administrative commission has no mandate and per the Book of Order no authority to take over the session at this time.

> A year prior to be exact. And Joe is not a trustee of the church and had no authority to sign off on the project which he admitted in court. Per the Book of Order, only a trustee can sign off on such a project.

> In other words, Joe considers himself above the law. From a legal perspective of an attorney trying to defend the action of a corrupt minister, I can see that argument. But the fact is that for two years Joe lied to the congregation about what was going on with the project and that is another matter. Until I got involved, no one knew that Joe was obligating the church to this project. Only when I finally got him into court under oath did the truth begin to come out.

> Well that is the only positive thing I have seen regarding the administrative commission if it is true. But you cannot believe anything that Joe says. Especially when you consider that a week after Joe committed HPC to the project in January 2003 (even amid all the turmoil) he resigned as office of Independence Heights, Inc. He committed the church to the project and then backed out.  After that, the administrative commission stepped in.

> And we have not even gotten started. The nightmare is because Joe has refused to speak straight to the congregation regarding what is going on with the Independence Heights Project. He failed to mention how he and others set up the Independence Heights, Inc in March 2002, prior to a vote by the session. My web site has many of these details. I will probably post the amended petition in the lawsuit today which should give a lot more of the details.

> Actually there were 24 members who sent official complaints up to Presbytery about a month ago. There are another fifteen that are definitely against Joe who for one reason or another did not file an official complaint. Some of the members have come from churches that have been disbanded by the Presbytery and do not have the inclination to fight them again. We are talking about a congregation whose membership includes a large number of senior citizens.

> Here is the breakdown on this. There are 114 active members who attend church regularly. There are an additional 25 who live out of town or reside in nursing homes or retirement facilities or who are incoherent. There are another 29 who need to be moved to the inactive role. But to do this would show that the membership has dwindled since Joe came five years ago. Joe boasts that he has increased the membership but that is only because the rolls have not been purged. That leaves about 18 unaccounted members to get to Joe’s number. As they say, “Figures do not lie, but liars figure.”

> I find the word “covet” to be interesting. It shows a greedy personality to use that word. I think a less greedy liar would use a word like “cherish” or “appreciate“.

In Jesus’ name,

WorldPeace