Minimizing litter in South Carolina is a worthy mission, but Gov. Mark Sanford doesn't think it is worth $2 million a year in state money. He's not alone. Surely such a hefty state expenditure isn't needed to convince South Carolinians to pick up their trash.
Sen. David Thomas, R-Greenville, who helped start Palmetto Pride and serves as its chairman, warns that the governor's proposal to sharply reduce, if not eliminate, state funding would result in messier highways -- and ultimately, in negative effects on economic development and tourism in South Carolina.
But while it's important to keep our state clean, paying the director of Palmetto Pride operations a $90,000 salary with $30,000 in fringe benefits is out of kilter with state agencies with far more critical public functions. While we recognize that Palmetto Pride is a nonprofit rather than a state agency, it gets all but $30,000 of its budget from the state, making it only fair to judge it by state standards.
By comparison, the adjutant general and superintendent of education both make $92,007.
And surely the state shouldn't be paying the Palmetto Pride director, who oversees a staff of seven, nearly as much as it pays Department of Corrections Director Jon Ozmint ($124,698). After all, Mr. Ozmint oversees a staff of more than 5,800 at 29 facilities and must care for -- and protect the public from -- more than 24,000 incarcerated adult offenders. The governor's salary, by the way, is $106,078.
Sen. Thomas is defensive of the program and its source of funding. He notes the money comes from fines for traffic and litter offenses and its four-part approach -- ad campaigns, education programs, intensified litter-law enforcement and increased cleanup drives -- has been successful. Of course, those fines that fund the program are public dollars that could well be used by state agencies.
Certainly, cleaning up our state is an admirable goal. But does it require a $1 million annual advertising campaign and a staff of eight at a payroll cost of roughly $400,000? Further, is the task one that could be done by an existing agency?
Indeed, why is this task given to a nonprofit that raises relatively few private dollars? The hope is that the upcoming budget debate will provide the answers.
Click here to return to story:
http://www.charleston.net/stories/100204/edi_02edit2.shtml