The Meru County Government has dismissed claims circulating on social media that it demanded KSh3.6 million from Pastor Ezekiel Odero to host a two-day prayer crusade at Kinoru Stadium, insisting that the facility is not under county management.
In a statement issued on Tuesday, county officials said the only county-related charge connected to the planned event was KSh18,200 for advertising, posters and noise control licensing, adding that the stadium is managed by Sports Kenya.
Meru County Executive Committee Member for Sports Elias Murega termed the allegations “public theatrics” and challenged the Coast-based preacher to provide documentary proof that the county had issued such an invoice.
“On the current matter involving Pastor Ezekiel Odero, there have been claims suggesting that Meru County Government charged KSh3.6 million. For the sake of truth and public accountability, I wish to state clearly: if such a claim is being made, it must be supported with verifiable documentation, save for KSh18,200 to be charged for adverts, posters and noise control license,” said Murega.
He added that if the pastor was not engaging in theatrics, he should table any official county invoice reflecting the disputed amount.
County Executive Committee Member for Finance Monica Kathono also clarified that the county had no authority to lease out the stadium because it does not manage the facility, noting that its role was limited to processing a noise permit for the gathering.
Kathono said Governor Mutuma M’Ethingia remains supportive of religious activities and church events across the county.
The clarification follows a viral video in which Pastor Ezekiel claimed he had been asked to pay KSh3.6 million to hold the crusade, saying the amount was unprecedented compared to other meetings he had conducted locally and abroad.
“I have done meetings in different countries but I have not paid such amount of money. They wrote an invoice of Sh3.6 million to conduct a two-day crusade,” the preacher says in the widely shared clip.
The remarks sparked online debate, with county officials moving to distance themselves from the alleged invoice and maintain that no such fee originated from county offices.
Edited by John Majau
