|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
***
A veteran South Carolina solicitor and GOP candidate for attorney general is facing a newly filed ethics complaint alleging he received more than $36,000 in so-called reimbursements through a years-long series of monthly installments.
The complaint, filed with the S.C. State Ethics Commission (SCSEC), alleges that Eighth Circuit Solicitor David Stumbo directed or approved fixed monthly payments of either $1,100 or $950 to himself for 35 consecutive months.
“It appears this money came from Mr. Stumbo’s office accounts and not a county or state account,” the complaint stated. “Upon information and belief, Mr. Stumbo personally signed checks to himself or directed someone [within his office] to make payments to him…”
***
A LABELING PROBLEM…
***
The allegations of financial impropriety are bolstered by Stumbo’s own Statements of Economic Interest (SEI), which show he reported his alleged office payments under three different labels for three consecutive years: “mileage reimbursement” in 2023, “mileage allowance” in 2024 and simply “mileage” in 2025.
Those payouts totaled $4,400 logged in 2023, $13,200 logged in 2024 and $12,300 logged in 2025.
But the dollar amounts, the SCSEC complaint suggests, may be secondary. The labels themselves are flagged as independently problematic.
That’s because under S.C. Code of Laws § 8-13-700(A), public officials are barred from using their official offices to enrich themselves. That ban extends to both so-called “allowances” and broad “reimbursements” alike, even when publicly disclosed by a sitting solicitor.
As for the mileage argument, the ethics complaint contends it doesn’t have much gas in the tank.
***
RELATED | RESIDENCY PROBE CONFLICTED TO S.C. ATTORNEY GENERAL
***
Under S.C. Code of Laws § 8-13-1120, public officials are required to report “income” received from a government entity. Legitimate mileage reimbursements, by contrast, are not considered income – and are therefore exempt from disclosure on candidate SEI forms.
Yet Stumbo reported his so-called mileage reimbursements anyway, making him the only Palmetto State solicitor — among all 16 currently serving — to report any such compensation on an SEI, according to a comprehensive review of such records by FITSNews.
It was during that same review, conducted roughly one month before the ethics complaint was even filed, that FITSNews submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to Stumbo’s office seeking bank records and reimbursement forms related to his mileage.
We received no such records…
Instead, Stumbo’s office provided a list of miles (.pdf) he purportedly drove from 2022 through 2025, broken down by month, along with a corresponding list of payments the solicitor’s office made to Stumbo (.pdf) over that same period.
***
NO ROAD OUT…
***
Records provided by Stumbo’s office reveal that every payment supposedly covering “mileage” was either $1,100 or $950. According to those same records, approximately 10 payments were issued before the month they were meant to cover had even begun.
“‘A red flag is raised because… reported compensation from the office ends in an even zero number,” the complaint echoes. “It is obvious that this is not a reimbursement, especially since (Stumbo) does not report it as such.'”
Adding to the intrigue, Stumbo’s own accounting of his payments totals $32,600. Yet FITSNews calculated the figure at $36,700.
We were not alone in noticing…
The $4,100 discrepancy, as well as the rounded reimbursement numbers and the pre-dated payments were all included in the newly filed ethics complaint accusing Stumbo of taking “extra allowance or compensation” from his office.
The complaint further noted that Stumbo stopped reimbursing himself from his office’s coffers in July 2025, around the same time he purportedly received a separate FOIA request seeking documentation related to his 2024 and 2025 SEIs.
***
“The fact he ceased payments after being questioned about it proves he knew it was wrong,” the complainant wrote in their closing argument to the SCSEC.
Either way, the formal complaint argues, there is no road out for the four-term solicitor.
If the payments were legitimate reimbursements for “mileage,” as Stumbo maintains, the money had no business on his SEI reports. And if they were an “allowance,” as Stumbo has simultaneously labeled them, the money was never his to take.
Despite a litany of outstanding questions related to who authorized the payments, the source of the funds, the discrepancy associated with them or the ethics complaint detailing all of the above, Stumbo did not respond to a request for comment from FITSNews.
As for the SCSEC, the agency wrote in an email that it could “neither confirm nor deny the existence” of a complaint or investigation into Stumbo.
All of this comes as Stumbo, First Circuit Solicitor David Pascoe and State Senator Stephen Goldfinch square off in a three-way race to become the Palmetto State’s next top prosecutor.
Write to Andrew Fancher at andy@fitsnews.com.
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR…
Andrew Fancher is a Lone Star Emmy Award–winning journalist from Dallas, Texas. He joined FITSNews in 2023 after leaving an NBC affiliate, where he served as on-air talent. His reporting focuses on public corruption in South Carolina, with an emphasis on law enforcement misconduct and abuse of power.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
11 comments
There seems to be constant negative articles about Stumbo on this site.. Makes me wonder why he’s being targeted? Could it be the people of SC like his straightforward message and he’s a true conservative and not a “Johnny come lately”?
FITS has run negative stories on consecutive days about Stumbo and Goldfinch. Only one clear answer for who’s pushing those.
So, you have made it clear that his alleged behavior, supported by clear evidence, crimes that involve county, state, and federal money, because he is an attorney, a prosecutor, a person trusted to always be upright and just, that he is such a nice ethical person he should be let off the hook
When and where did I say that? Because I didn’t. All I said was it sure looks like one person is pushing negative stories out about his opponents. That doesn’t mean the negatives aren’t true.
Things like this have for many years been suspected to have been happening inside the Chas County Public Defenders Office under the previous management.
SC is a cesspool. Citizens must rise up against the crooks in government.
SC needs more prisons
Nothing about this surprises me. I know multiple people that have worked with him and I know the reputation he has in a couple of the counties he serves. I don’t know much about his opponents in the primary, but I know enough about him to know that anyone has to be a better alternative.
Where there is Smoke there is FIRE!! If the Truth Hurts his Friends Feelings,, TOO Bad!!!
So, Andy Fancher is back at FITSNews. or never left, or what?
Anyway, I believe life begins at fertilization and the death penalty is state-sanctified taking of a human life which, according to the crucifixion story, has the potential of redemption and of being taken with Jesus Christ into paradise even if repenting only at the last minute and only after having mocked Jesus Christ for the better part of the crucifixion event.
Capital punishment is not a deterrent of crime but is basically a full-employment program for lawyers at the cost of millions to the tax-payers.
I want to hear about the candidates’ positions on these big MORAL issues, not the nickel-and-dime gossip about office management.
And in response to Susan Aiken and J Doe above, there is a nickel-and-dime story being pushed against David Pascoe, too, not that I support that guillotine-glorifier.
Everybody, grow up and grow some real consciences!
So he was trying to be honest and report all the monies he received and he is being vilified for doing that? Looks like he may be overly honest to a fault . All the more reason to vote for him.
Pfft!
Misprision of Felony comes to mind for those who knew what he was doing, but stayed silent.
You?
David Pascoe is one of the few in S.C. government that is not corrupt