McKie still owes $51.850

Amelia McKie still owes $51,850 to the South Carolina Ethics Commission. She is past any period of appeal. This is how much she owes and must pay.

There won't be any "deals" now. The Ethics Commission will attempt to collect from her, as it no doubt has already tried. Next step will be to turn the debt over to the South Carolina Department of Revenue.

The Department of Revenue has two programs for collecting debt - the Set Off Debt Program and the Governmental Enterprise Accounts Receivable Collections (GEAR) Program. How far could the DOR go in collecting a debt? The DOR has a wide variety of debt-collection methods and tools, including court action and seeking judgments.

It would be a lot cleaner to work out a payment plan with the Ethics Commission and comply with it.

McKie continues to act as Chair of the Richland 2 School Board, in spite of issues raised about the legitimacy of her position on the board.

She was elected to the board on November 6, 2018, and she took the oath of office on November 13 in violation of S.C. Code of Laws §8-13-1110(A). She was not eligible to take the oath of office on that day because she had not filed the required Statement of Economic Interests Report with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. The law is crystal clear.

She did file that required Statement on December 4. Upon doing so, she became eligible to take the oath of office. But she has not taken the oath of office since becoming eligible.

Thus, she is not legally on the board. Because she is not legally on the Board, she cannot serve as Board Chair.

Yet the five legal members of the board allow her to do so.

What's important here? Integrity. Responsibility. Transparency.

The right action for Mrs. McKie would be to step away from the Board Chair role and even step off the board until she cleans up her financial mess. The five legal members of the board shouldn't have to force her to do, but they may have to.

Who is for transparency and accountability?

I'm so glad I came across Brad Warthen's blog today. I got an education on the election race for the Richland 2 School Board in 2014. Remember that one? That's where race surfaced as an identity issue in the School Board race.

In case you forgot, check out Brad's blog right here.

In the linked article Brad leads off with "I really, really hated to see the first sentence of this story about the Richland School District 2 election:  'Race has become the defining issue in the Richland 2 school board election, as rumors circulate of a shift in power from a white-majority to a black-majority board.' "

Well down in the body of the article appears this "Because if Amelia McKie .. is elected, we’ll have a strong voice on R2’s school board who’ll fight for students, communicate with parents and demand real transparency and accountability."

Now that was back in 2014. Fast forward to 2018-2019.

Amelia McKie is the one who didn't file Campaign Disclosure Forms and Statements of Economic Interest Reports with the South Carolina Ethics Commission for several years. Amelia McKie now owes over $51,000 in fines and penalties to the Ethics Commission.

Amelia McKie is the one (well, one of them) who took the oath of office illegally on November 13, 2018 for her second term of office, 2018-2022.

How's that for transparency and accountability?

Who will demand "real transparency and accountability" from Amelia McKie? The Richland 2 Black Parents' Association has said that McKie's problem with the Ethics Commission is not about race; it's about ethics.

Will the BPA step up and put some pressure on McKie to obey S.C. Code of Laws 8-13-1110(A) and now legally take the oath of office?

School Board emails - Big Problem?

Since November 13, 2018 Richland 2 School Board has presented two people as members of the Board when, in fact, they are not.

Here's one more piece of the puzzle called Problems.

These two people were elected by Richland 2 School District voters on November 6. Then they took the oath of office on November, but they took the oath on November 13 in violation of S.C. Code of Laws 8-13-1110(A). Since taking the oath was illegal, they are not yet legitimate Board members.

Amelia McKee was re-elected; Teresa Holmes was elected for the first time.

Each has an email address posted on the Richland 2 website under School Board members. McKie's email address is ameliamckie@richland2.org. Since she has not been a legal school board member since November 13, 2018, she should not have a District 2 email address. The District should suspend that email address and remove her from the Member listing on its website, until she takes the oath of office legally.

Holmes doesn't use a Richland 2 School District email address. For some reason, the District is allowing her to use a private email account, "docholmesschoolboard2@gmail.com".

There is a serious problem facing Richland 2 for allowing her to use an off-server email address. The Hillary Clinton private email server scandal provides a clear reason why all official email should be only on the official email platform.

Should a member of the community, a media service or even a law-enforcement agency submit a FOIA request all for official emails to and from Teresa Holmes, could he or it have a reason to suspect the quantity in the FOIA response? Could there be off-server emails (sent or received) that were not included? Who would know?

Remember how some people wanted to believe that Clinton hadn't done anything wrong? Even today more emails are surfacing that should have been provided long ago. And, legally, there never should have been any there in the first place. Everything should have been right in Clinton's secure .gov email account.

Does Holmes know the FOIA rules? Did the District explain that all official emails, received and sent, at her private email address are subject to FOIA? Would Holmes have any problem if every one of the emails on that account was inspected, even the private messages?

Has she ever deleted any email from that gmail.com account? Did she ever delete official-District email from that account, even one as innocuous as "Are you going to the meeting?" NO official business email is to be deleted. Does District 2 have a signed statement from her that the FOIA email rules have been explained to her?

What happens when she is not re-elected in 2022? What happens to all the official District 2 emails in that account? Will she just dump them? How would District 2 respond to a FOIA request in 2023 for official email to and from her? Would she say,"Nobody told me anything", as she did in regard to the late filing of her Statement of Economic Interest Report?

Holmes should not even be receiving any official District email or documents, since she hasn't yet legally taken the oath of office. When she does take it, the District should set up an official email account for her and post it on the website.

Why the legality of the Board matters

At the school board meeting on March 12, 2019, the Board discussed confidential student matters in the closed Executive Session between 5:30-6:30PM.

In the public session the Board voted on student matters. You can view the Board meeting on YouTube; start at 42:12 on the timer.

The first vote pertained to "Student 1", and Mr. Manning made a motion to deny the student's appeal (of suspension or transfer?) and uphold the recommendation of the administration, and Mrs. Agostini seconded.

The vote was 3-4; the motion failed.

Voting Yes (to deny) were Manning, Agostini, Caution-Parker.
Voting No were Elkins-Johnson, McKie, Shadd, Holmes

If only the legal members of the Board had voted, then the result would have been different.

Voting Yes (to deny) would have been Manning, Agostini, Caution-Parker.
Voting No would have been Elkins-Johnson, McKie, Shadd, Holmes

The motion to deny the student's appeal would have passed. Would there have been a second motion to deal with Student 1?

Because the motion was announced as Failed, the next motion made was to transfer Student 1 to Blythewood Academy.

Voting Yes were Elkins-Johnson, McKie, Shadd, Holmes
Voting No were Manning, Agostini, Caution-Parker

McKie announced that the motion passed.

HOWEVER, the true vote by legal Board members was

Voting Yes were Elkins-Johnson, McKie, Shadd, Holmes
Voting No were Manning, Agostini, Caution-Parker

Thus, the true vote was 2-3, and the motion actually failed. Student 1's transfer to Blythewood Academy was NOT approved.

If anyone knows Student 1, his parents and he should be informed of this, and they will probably want to consult with their attorney. Further, the District has an obligation to inform Student 1 of the true vote. Will it do so?

This is only one example of the problems this Board has created and which it must correct, because of its having only five legal members since November 13, 2018.

A motion was made to transfer Student 2 to Blythewood Academy. The vote was 7-0 (actually, 5-0), but the transfer was still approved.

Motion by Manning re Student 3 to deny the appeal.

The vote was 4-3, and the motion passed.

Voting Yes were Agostini, Manning, Caution-Parker, McKie

Voting No were Elkins-Johnson, Shadd, Holmes

However, when you strike the votes of the illegal members of the Board:

Voting Yes were Agostini, Manning, Caution-Parker, McKie

Voting No were Elkins-Johnson, Shadd, Holmes

The motion still passes, but the vote was 3-2.

What if an unfair liability is assigned to Blythewood Academy Principal Marylin Ross Frederick for accepting the transfer of Student 1? She's only doing her job as Principal, but now she has at least one student in her school who is not supposed to be there.

This is why Richland 2 School Board must stop conducting business with two people who are not legally seated on the Board.

Updated 3/20/19 8:08AM

McKie and the S.C. Ethics Commission

Amelia McKie, who sits in the position of Chair of the Richland 2 School Board, owes more than $51,000 to the South Carolina Ethics Commission.

In February the Ethics Commission told me that there would be no hearing on her matter that month, but there would be one in March.

Early in March the Ethics Commission told me that there would be no hearing on McKie at the March regular hearing date.

Will McKie just get lost among the 300 debtors on the multi-page list that is posted on the Ethics Commission website? They are "so busy" at the Ethics commission that the debtor's list, dated 1/3/2019, has not been updated. That ought to be somebody's job there. After all, it could bring in much-needed revenue to run the Commission.

Prominently displayed on the homepage of the Ethics Commission is this headline:

"Restoring Public Trust in Government"

Lucas Daprile, a reporter at The State, wrote an interesting article on March 6, 2019 about the deadbeats on the Ethics Commission's debtor's list. You can read it here.

It seems that McKie isn't even a legitimate member of the Richland 2 School Board, except she has been sitting in the position as Chair after being sworn in on November 13, 2018. The problem is that she violated S.C. Code of Laws Section 8-13-1110(A), when she took the oath of office on that date. So she is not really sworn in and is not really a Board member. There are six other members of the Board (well, really only five legitimate members) who are not doing anything about McKie's illegal participation on the Board.

Could I take the oath of office for a School Board member and just sit down at the front of the room twice a month. You say that I wasn't elected and haven't filed a Statement of Economic Interests? So what? I took the oath. How fast would Richland 2 security or a deputy sheriff remove me?

A Richland 2 parent told me that she believes McKie wasn't even entitled to be on the November 6, 2018, ballot. Seems McKie had a "little problem" and didn't file campaign disclosure reports. See Note below for viewing McKie's past-due campaign disclosure reports.

So, tell me once more about "Restoring public trust in government"?

The Ethics Commission should turn McKie's debt over to the S.C. Department of Revenue. If the DOR can't collect it in three months, they should turn it over to a private collection agency with instructions to sue within three months. Then hope that there is a judge in some court around here who won't let it languish on his docket for 5-6 years.

NOTE: To find Amelia McKie's campaign disclosure reports, all the way back to 2015, follow these steps:
Go to ethics.sc.gov
On the hompage, click on the link near the top "Public Reporting"
On page for Public Disclosure and Accountability Reporting Welcome, click on "Individual Financial Reports"
On page for Public Disclosure and Accountability Reporting Individual Reports, click on "Candidate Reports"
For Individual Reports Candidates, enter McKie; select office of School Board Trustee; select Year of 2018. Click "Next"
Select District as RICHLAND #2. Click SEARCH
Click on the Name, "McKie, Amelia B"

In that long list, you'll see all the campaign disclosure reports that she filed late. You'll also see the Statement of Economic Interest Reports that she filed late. You'll also see one filed 8/15/2014 for Year 2014, so she can't say that she didn't know she was supposed to file them.

Ethics - do they matter?

How important are ethics in business? in personal lives? to you?

In the Columbia, S.C. news since late last year have been items of ethical issues involving members of the Richland 2 School Board members.

Most of these matters have now been cleared up.

There is one major matter outstanding. It involves the fines and penalties assessed against Amelia McKie, Chair of the Richland 2 School Board. She owes more than $51,000 to the South Carolina Ethics Commission.

Mrs. McKie's first term on the Board was 2014-2018. She ran for re-election and was successful on November 6, 2018. In the latter half of 2018 she served as Chair of the Board, having been elected to that position by the Board members serving at the time of the election of officers of the board.

On November 13, 2018, Mrs. McKie was administered the oath of office and commenced her duties as Board member for the term of office 2018-2022.

Mrs. McKie had failed to file numerous required documents with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. These required documents included quarterly campaign financial disclosure filings and annual Statements of Economic Interests.

Other media have reported the details of the missing reports and the starting levels of fines. As Mrs. McKie refused to pay the fines that were being levied against her, the amounts increased. Other media have reported that, when she failed to make a payment by December 31, 2018, a large penalty was added, and her fines and penalties now total over $51,000.

Where is the outrage over the Chairperson of a public School Board owing this sizable sum of money to the Ethics Commission?

Only a handful of parents have spoken up at school board meetings. There has been, up until now, no way for one parent to know of another parent's complaints.

There is, on the part of some parents, a feeling that Mrs. McKie was not legally entitled to have her name on the November 2018 General Election ballot, due to her lack of compliance with required filings at the S.C. Ethics Commission. I have not researched that myself.

It was a close election for the four open seats (seven Board members). The top five vote-getters were

• Amelia McKie (I) 26,033
• James Manning (I) 21,740
• Teresa Jones Holmes 20,398
• Cheryl Caution Parker (I) 19,182
• Craig Plank (I) 17,313

Is there a valid school board?

At the March 12, 2019, school board meeting, I read the following statement:

Members of the Board and Supt. Davis,

My name is Gus Philpott.

As much as anyone here tonight, I regret having to bring this issue again to your attention. It will continue to come up until the problem is resolved.

I believe that two of the Board members are not legally entitled to sit. I believe you must immediately leave your seats. I hope the attorney for the School District is present now to advise you.

To sit at these desks, to act as Board members and make decisions involving student affairs and millions of dollars of District assets, each of you must be duly elected and properly sworn in.

This Board has had an unresolved legal problem since November 13, 2018. Why do I say this?

Election day was November 6, 2018.

According to a message from Richland 2 School District, on November 13 Mrs. McKie was administered the oath of office for the 2018-to-2022 term of office and entered upon the duties of Board member. If the oath of office was administered to Ms. Holmes on that date, this applies to her, too. I assert that administration of the oath of office to them was in violation of State law.

South Carolina Code of Laws Section 8-13-1110(A) reads in part, “No public official … may take the oath of office or enter upon his official responsibilities unless he has filed a statement of economic interests in accordance with the provision of this chapter with the appropriate supervisory office.” Violating this Section is a misdemeanor under Code of Laws Section 8-13-1520.

As of November 18^th Mrs. McKie had not filed the State of Economic Interests Report with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. She did not do so until December 4, 2018. Ms. Holmes also filed her first Statement of Economic Interests on December 4^th.

Thus, having not filed the required Statement, neither was eligible to take office.

The proper action is for Mrs. McKie and Ms. Holmes to stand up now and step away from the Board. Immediately. Mrs. McKie is not legally a Board member and cannot be the Chair of this Board.

When the Chair’s position is vacant, the Vice-Chair assumes the duties of the Chair.

If she does not immediately leave the Board, then all of you become complicit in the illegal functioning of this Board.

Should they be administered the oath of office at some future date, then they can become Board members. Mrs. McKie cannot reclaim the position of Chair, unless she would be elected to it a future regular election of officers.

As both were not legally Board members, I request that the District recover all funds improperly paid to them. A review of all decisions made by this Board should be made. If their votes were the deciding votes in any decision regarding a student suspension, expulsion or transfer or in any financial or other matter, I request a new vote on each matter.

At the end of the March 12th Board meeting, Ms. Holmes made her Board comments. You can hear her toward the end of the YouTube video. It was the only time during the entire meeting that any Board member spoke loudly and clearly into the microphone. She defended her legitimacy of Board membership.

After the end of the meeting, I approached Teresa Holmes. A Richland County deputy stood by our conversation. Ms. Holmes told me in no uncertain terms that she was doing nothing wrong and was properly on the Board.

By the time I was 18 (and that was quite a few years ago), I had become acquainted with the phrase "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." I think those words do not exist in her vocabulary.