A $1 million scandal at the center of a new lawsuit in South Carolina is drawing attention to how public agencies handle executive departures. This sudden, lucrative departure sparked a debate over whether residents are being shut out of decisions they have a right to see.
At the center of the dispute is a nearly $1 million severance package for the former leader of the state ports agency.
Here's what to know
In Charleston County, Frank Heindel, whom the South Carolina Daily Gazette described as a retired Mount Pleasant businessman and longtime public-records activist, sued the S.C. State Ports Authority, saying the agency broke state open-meetings and public-records laws when its board did not take a public vote on severance for former president and CEO Barbara Melvin.
Heindel says state law requires the authority to approve, in public, compensation for its executive director and division directors, including severance. He points to the circumstances of Melvin's Aug. 21, 2025, resignation, which followed an unscheduled board executive session held without a publicly disclosed purpose.
The South Carolina Daily Gazette reported that the package included $822,780 in pre-tax salary continuation through the end of 2025 and a $100,000 retirement contribution. The agency did not comment on the suit.
The authority's position, relayed by authority lawyer Randy Lowell, is that a vote was unnecessary because the payout was less than what Melvin's contract allowed. Heindel rejects that argument, saying the contract did not entitle Melvin to severance unless she resigned for good reason.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
More background
The Ports Authority plays a major role in South Carolina's economy, influencing shipping, jobs, infrastructure, and business growth.
Rather than asking the court to reverse Melvin's severance package, Heindel is seeking a ruling on how the authority acted. As the South Carolina Daily Gazette reported, he wants a judge to declare that state law was violated and to prevent similar conduct in the future.
What's being done?
Heindel is asking for attorney's fees and public notice if he wins. He seeks a public declaration that the law was broken, an injunction against similar conduct, payment of his legal costs, and an order requiring the authority to post any adverse finding on its website for six months.
Melvin said only that she planned "to pursue other opportunities." In the lawsuit, Heindel argues, "The authority cannot bypass that statutory public vote mandate by characterizing discretionary executive payouts as pre-existing contractual duties when the contract creates no such right."
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
