12 On Your Side Investigates: Aiken County Superintendent declines Minolfo interview

AIKEN COUNTY, S.C. (WRDW/WAGT) — As another school year begins in Aiken County, a cloud of unanswered questions still hangs over the district’s handling of its now-former human resources chief.

Aiken County Public Schools has released more than 1,200 pages of records connected to Dr. Sal Minolfo, the district’s former Chief Officer of Human Resources and Administration.

12 On Your Side first uncovered that Minolfo was on paid administrative leave earlier this year. Since then, we have been pushing for public records and answers about why he was placed on leave, what the district knew, what taxpayers paid and why Minolfo was promoted to lead Human Resources despite prior documented concerns.

The district initially refused to release some public records. Those records were turned over only after WRDW/WAGT got station attorneys involved.

Now, ACPS says the investigation is complete, but Superintendent Dr. Corey Murphy is still declining to sit down for an interview.

Superintendent declines interview

Earlier this year, ACPS declined to make Murphy available for an interview, citing the ongoing investigation into Minolfo.

After the district released additional records and said the remaining investigation had concluded, 12 On Your Side again requested an on-camera interview with Murphy.

This was the response:

“Superintendent Dr. Corey Murphy will not be available for an interview regarding this matter.Aiken County Public Schools has released the records subject to disclosure under the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act. With the release of these records, the district considers this matter complete and does not have additional information to provide.”

However, releasing records is not the same thing as answering questions.

The records still do not answer why Minolfo was promoted to lead Human Resources, what district leaders knew before that promotion, whether the school board knew about prior documented concerns, or whether Minolfo’s retirement stopped the district from making final findings.

What the records show

The newly released records show the investigation into Minolfo was broader than the public first knew.

The records include notices of allegations, interview summaries, text messages, dismissal notices, invoices and law firm bills.

They show at least three separate matters involving multiple district employees.

The records describe allegations involving relationships, recusal, power and professional boundaries.

The records do not show final findings against Minolfo. Several notices say no determination had been made at the time they were issued.

Dismissal notices say complaints were dismissed because Minolfo was no longer employed by the district.

Minolfo retired in May after about two months on paid administrative leave.

Acknowledged relationship with employee he supervised

In one matter, the investigator’s summary says Minolfo acknowledged a sexual relationship with an employee he supervised more than a decade ago.

According to the investigator’s summary, Minolfo said the relationship began around 2011-2012, while he was Director of Special Programs.

The summary says Minolfo acknowledged he supervised the employee and described himself as the “ultimate decision maker” for that department.

The notice of allegations in that matter also included claims about caseloads, a job move and whether the relationship created a conflict of interest.

Minolfo disputed portions of the allegations, according to the records.

Recusal and power concerns

Another matter involved a complainant who acknowledged the physical and personal relationship with Minolfo was consensual.

But she said that was not the issue.

In a note included in the records, the complainant wrote that Minolfo should have recused himself from work matters involving her because they had an intimate relationship.

She described it as a “misuse of power” for Minolfo to continue to investigate, allocate, support or otherwise handle work matters connected to her while they had an on-and-off personal relationship.

The notice in that matter says no determination had been made.

The complaint form sought protection from retaliation, an alternate investigator, an alternate supervisor and removal of a letter from the complainant’s personnel file related to a redacted issue.

Text messages and professional boundaries

The records include extensive text messages.

Some are personal. Some are professional. Some are explicit.

12 On Your Side is not publishing the most graphic messages in full because they are not necessary to understand the public-interest issue.

The more significant texts involve professional treatment, recusal and whether personal relationships affected work matters.

In one Matter 3 text exchange, Minolfo wrote:

“What I can tell you is that my personal life doesn’t impact my professional life.”

He also wrote:

“I won’t mistreat you and I won’t especially dog you in my professional life or do things to hurt you…”

And:

“That’s not cool and we both suffer when things are brought to work. We both have suffered.”

Those messages go to a central question raised by the records: whether the district’s top HR official kept personal relationships separate from professional authority.

Taxpayer costs

The records also show what the investigation cost taxpayers.

ACPS paid Dr. Kelly Pew / LEAD Consulting $44,343.75 for outside investigation work.

The district says Pew’s work included 43 interviews and review of several hundred pages of documents.

ACPS also released outside law firm bills totaling $82,879.67 for March, April and May 2026.

The district said those law firm bills do not break out Minolfo-specific work from other FOIA and personnel matters handled by the firm during the same period.

ACPS also charged WRDW/WAGT $360 for the latest records release.

Combined, the released investigation, legal and records-release costs total $127,583.42. However, only $44,343.75 is directly identified in the records as outside investigation work. The district says the law firm bills are not broken out by Minolfo-specific work.

Questions remain

ACPS says it considers the matter complete.

But the records leave major unanswered questions.

Among them:

• Did ACPS ever make final findings in the matters involving Minolfo?
• Did Minolfo’s retirement stop the district from issuing final findings?
• Why was Minolfo promoted to lead Human Resources despite prior documented concerns?
• What did Murphy know before that promotion?
• Did Murphy review Minolfo’s personnel file before the promotion?
• Did the school board know about prior relationship, recusal or conflict-of-interest concerns?
• Was Minolfo ever required to recuse himself from work matters involving employees with whom he had personal or intimate relationships?
• Who approved the outside investigator and related costs?
• What policy changes, if any, are now in place?

The district says it has released the records required under South Carolina FOIA and has no additional information to provide.