Tuesday, July 13, 2021

Amelia McKie now Owes Ethics Commission $57,100

The South Carolina Ethics Commission published an updated list of Debtors on July 6, 2021. You can view this list by going to ethics.sc.gov and clicking on "Debtors" at the top right of the homepage.

Not-quite board member, and newly-elected* Secretary of the Board, Amelia McKie, now owes a total of $57,100 to the Ethics Commission.

Her previous balance was $51.800. Where did the $5,300 increase come from?

In the Remarks column for her entry, the Ethics Commission notes Default Years of 2016, 2020 and 2021. This means that something happened this year - 2021 - that resulted in additional fines of $5,300. This sum increased her total debt from $51,800 to $57,100.

An inquiry for public information is being registered today with the Ethics Commission.

McKie was re-elected to the school board in November 2018. What's that old Beatles' song? "With a little help from my friends"? Well, with a lot of help from her friends. I think she bragged at one time about 26,000 of her "friends" (voters).

What kind of friends support a person who doesn't pay her debts?

On July 10, 2019 the Ethics Commission filed a judgment against McKie for $51,750 in the Richland County Common Pleas Court. That followed a Decision & Order by the Ethics Commission in 2018. At my last inquiry to the Ethics Commission earlier this year, McKie HAD NOT PAID ONE PENNY TOWARD THAT JUDGMENT. 


McKie was fined another $50 for late filing of a required form. And now the Ethics Commission has slammed her with a new $5,300!

* On June 29, 2021 the school board disregarded a plea from one District resident (me) for them to elect only fully-qualified board members as officers for 2021-2022. In a 4-3 vote McKie was elected as Board Secretary. Holmes was elected Board Chair in a 5-2 vote. Neither Holmes nor McKie was entitled to vote, because neither is a legitimate board member!

The board had definitely left its thinking caps at home that night. McKie (and Teresa Holmes) never should have been elected as officers for the new school year, because neither is a legitimate board member. Neither has ever taken the oath of office legally. James Manning never should have nominated Holmes.

Why is this not important to Mannng, Caution-Parker and McFadden? I strongly suspect it is important to Agostini and Scott (Elkins).

Four of the five legal board members could put a stop to the usurping of public office by Holmes and McKie. Why don't they?