Tag: S.C. Ethics Commission

Curtis M. Loftis Jr., South Carolina’s treasurer

S.C. Treasurer Loftis to Appeal Ethics Fine

Earlier this week, S.C. Treasurer Curtis Loftis was fined $500 and reprimanded by the S.C. Ethics Commission for a supposed violation of state ethics law.

The ethics commission found Loftis made an “inadvertent” and “unintentional” violation when he hired attorney Michael Montgomery to assist in a lawsuit the treasurer brought against Bank of New York Mellon related to the bank’s fees and handling of investments associated with the S.C. Retirement System Investment Commission.

Montgomery and Loftis both sit on the Board of Trustees of the Saluda Charitable Trust, a connection the ethics commissioners said created the conflict.

Loftis said he will appeal the decision and fine.

In response to the ethics commission decision, Loftis stated, “While I am gratified that the commission acknowledged this alleged violation was inadvertent and unintentional, I will appeal this decision and the $500 administrative fee. This was a subjective and unprecedented ruling – and I fear that letting it stand would impose burdens upon the selfless service of thousands of people across the state that devote their time to nonprofit boards and organizations.

“This action was filed by cronies of the SC Investment Commission, the same Commission that lost $7 billion of the public’s money through their disastrous investment decisions. I blew the whistle on their unbelievably poor performance and this is just one part of their retribution. South Carolinians know the sorry state of their government and they have twice elected me to fight for them in Columbia. This decision will not keep me from my duties to the people… I work for them and not the handful of rich and powerful elites that run our state.”

Continue Reading →
Ethics Reform – Not So Fast

Want Ethics Reform – Fire Ethics Commission Head

A good first step toward ethics reform in South Carolina would be to fire S.C. Ethics Commission Executive Director Herb Hayden.

Last month, Richland County Circuit Judge Alison Lee approved a consent order ruling Hayden propagated a “falsehood” to a state ethics watchdog agency and in responding with a falsehood violated the Freedom of Information Act.

As part of the settlement, Hayden and the ethics commission maintained the falsehood was inadvertent and unintentional.

Continue Reading →
Ethics Reform – Not So Fast

S.C. Ethics Commission Limits Freedom of Information

Earlier this week, the S.C. Ethics Commission moved to restrict information flow to the media from agency personnel.

An announced new policy limits press inquiries and responses to Executive Director Herb Hayden taking the ethics commission attorney and deputy director out of the loop.

The new policy was announced by S.C. Ethics Commission chairman James Burns, a Gov. Nikki Haley appointee, during a commission meeting.

Continue Reading →
Ethics Reform – Not So Fast

Watered Down Ethics Reform Bill Nears Approval

A very watered down ethics reform bill was reported out of conference committee Wednesday and received an overwhelming vote of yeas in the S.C. House yesterday.

The bill must be approved by the Senate before going to Gov. Nikki Haley’s desk for signature.

But, the key measure needed for real ethics reform in South Carolina was left behind by the conference committee.

South Carolina’s legislators just can’t allow themselves to be at the mercy of an independent ethics commission, so the House and Senate Ethics Committees remain as the investigatory bodies for the state’s legislators.

Continue Reading →
Ethics Reform – Not So Fast

S.C. Ethics Commission Sued Over FOIA Request

The S.C. Ethics Commission and its executive director Herb Hayden have been sued by The South Carolina Public Interest Foundation for violating the FOIA law by “responding with a falsehood.”

The foundation, a Greenville based government watchdog organization, and its founder Ned Sloan have been very successful over the years filing lawsuits against government agencies and officials for violating state law.

The lawsuit evolves from an attempt by internet media outlet TheNerve.org to obtain a copy of a letter that ethics commission attorney Cathy Hazelwood sent to Gov. Nikki Haley directing the governor to reimburse the state for travels costs associated with a fundraising event.

Continue Reading →

Ethics Reform Discussion on Wrong Track

The current discussion on ethics reform for public officials in South Carolina appears to be veering off the main track that will establish public confidence in the governing process.

The discussion this week appears to be about additional funding for the S.C. Ethics Commission. Extra funding is necessary for this agency, which has been way underfunded for way too long.

According to ethics commission director Herb Hayden, approximately 70 percent of the funding for the agency’s budget comes from fees and fines.

Continue Reading →

Bobby Harrell and His Campaign Funds

South Carolina House Speaker Bobby Harrell has refused to provide detailed receipts of more than $325,000 he reimbursed himself from campaign contributions, according to an ongoing series of stories by Renee Dudley, AKA “little girl” of the Charleston Post and Courier.

For nearly a month, the reporter has been requesting receipts and itemized expenses, as required by state ethics law and subject to public disclosure. S.C. Code of Laws Section 8-13-1302 enumerates requirements for maintenance of expenditure records from campaign contributions.

Disclosure reports on campaign receipts and expenditures are required to be filed quarterly with the S.C. Ethics Commission. These are supposed to include a detailed listing of to whom and for what purpose expenditures are made.

Continue Reading →
The Investigation of Reynolds Williams and the $25 Billion S.C. Public Pension Fund Moves Forward

Williams Investigation Moves Forward

An investigation of alleged misconduct and conflict of interest against S.C. Retirement System Investment Commission chairman Reynolds Williams moved forward Tuesday when the S.C. Attorney General’s office requested SLED and the S.C. Ethics Commission to investigate the charges.

A Statement from AG Wilson’s Office: Based upon the nature of the allegations in the Treasurer’s letter, we are today forwarding the material we have on file to both SLED and the State Ethics Commission. (The Treasurer’s letter alleges activity that would fall under each authority, criminal and ethical.) When both entities have completed their reviews, we will then determine what, if any, prosecutorial action is warranted.

Enumerated in a letter from S.C. Treasurer Curtis Loftis to Attorney General Alan Wilson, the allegations stem from work Williams’ law firm did for American Timberlands, LLC while the company was being considered as a partner on an investment by the SCRSIC.

Continue Reading →

New Twist in Election Filing Case

A new twist has been added to the election filing controversy that affects many candidates for elective office throughout the state.

Even before the S.C. Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the case May 1, 2012, the S.C. House Legislative Ethics Committee has seen fit to send out notices of fines for late filing.

The letter below has been edited to eliminate the name of the candidate for public office who received it. However, this candidate is a first time office seeker who filed the Statement of Economic Interests SEI) after March 30, 2012 but before April 15, 2012.

Continue Reading →

S.C. Election Filing Mess – Part II

Every time we look at the mess created during election filing time by candidates who did not comply with state law, something else jumps out to further complicate the upcoming S.C. Supreme Court decision on two lawsuits filed to challenge discrepancies in the filings.

Yesterday we reported on the absolute mess in Horry County that, under strict adherence to state law, would disqualify enough candidates and incumbents to leave two county council, one state house, one state senate, sheriff, coroner, clerk of court, auditor and treasurer with no qualified candidates from either party to appear on the ballot.

That could mean all those seats are determined by write-in campaigns in November.

But, the mess does not end there. It seems the state legislators who passed the law could not be bothered to follow its provisions either.

Continue Reading →
1 2