A Charleston County School Board member accused of potential misconduct in an August state report defended herself in front of a three-person panel Monday.
Darlene Dunmeyer-Roberson sought to prove that she did not willingly share confidential information or pressure any school district staff into finding work for her former campaign manager, among other allegations.
In what became a four-hour hearing, she and her attorney, State Rep. Kambrell Garvin, D, Richland, argued against three particular claims that revolved around email threads and policy breaches identified in state Inspector General Brian Lamkin's report.
The pair denied any malice or merit to the claims that Dunmeyer-Roberson improperly disclosed information from executive session.
Garvin said the report lacked evidence to support the allegations. He saw the problem as more of a districtwide lack of proper policy protocol and understanding rather than as an issue specific to Dunmeyer-Roberson.
"Today’s testimony, as well as many of the things identified in the IG report, does not show that there is a Darlene Dunmeyer-Roberson problem," Garvin said. "It shows that problems, potentially, are greater."
The Sept. 28 hearing was the first of its kind under a 2022 state law that gave the governor the power to remove school board members who engage in various acts misconduct. For Dunmeyer-Roberson, those allegations include "malfeasance, misfeasance, conflicts of interest, policy violations, misconduct in office, and neglect of duty."
Gov. Henry McMaster called for the investigation and appointed the three members of Monday's panel:
- Charleston attorney Thomas Limehouse, who served as McMaster's chief legal council for eight years.
- Former U.S. Attorney for the District of South Carolina Adair Boroughs, who served under former President Joe Biden.
- Attorney Clarence Davis, who works for a North Carolina-based firm with offices in Columbia.
Lamkin gave a rundown of the office's case and answered the panel's questions to the best of his abilities; he repeatedly could not answer questions because the information was confidential.
He said Dunmeyer-Roberson had not put the district's interests above all else, which put confidential information in potential jeopardy.
“She is a fiduciary of the district. She’s supposed to protect the interests of the district. She didn’t protect the interests of the district when she forwarded attorney-client privilege material," Lamkin said in regard to emails Dunmeyer-Roberson forwarded to her personal email.
Lamkin said Dunmeyer-Roberson never removed herself from a list of vendors after she joined the board, and so that personal email was still linked with her vendor profile even if the last time she worked as a vendor for the school was in March 2022. So, by technicality, she had been sending confidential information to a school vendor.
Dunmeyer-Roberson said it was common practice for school board members to forward themselves emails because the district accounts automatically delete them after a certain amount of time.
"They’re emails about governance matters, emails about things that I would need to refer to, but it’s nothing that could harm the district,” she said.
The panel has until Oct. 5 to make a recommendation for McMaster's decision. He will then either remove Dunmeyer-Roberson from the school district board or allow her to continue serving. If the governor were to do so, it would be the first time under the 2022 state law that the power is used to remove a school board member.
