Reports on Hunley cost, legislative role wrong

By Glenn McConnell

You wrote a logical editorial ("Ethically Challenged," July 9) based on bad information. The flawed reporting originated from one reporter. From there, inaccurate information appeared in newspapers statewide.

News reports gave the impression that the Hunley project has cost taxpayers $100 million and that I have "secretly funneled" millions to the project. None of that is true. Here are the facts:

Actually, state appropriations have been about $4.5 million over the course of 10 years. If you include $5.3 million in federal grants, total public funding is less than $10 million, a far cry from the

$100 million published.

Also, no secrecy was involved. All state funds were voted on in open session. And no funds at all for restoration of the submarine have been appropriated in the past five years.

The most frustrating allegation is that I secretly funneled millions to the project. All funds appropriated were dedicated to the Hunley. They could not have been spent for any other purpose.

As chairman of the Hunley Commission, my duty was to review the paperwork before funds were actually spent. Somehow, my efforts to protect taxpayers were twisted and described as funneling funds to the project. Imagine the criticism I would have received if I had failed to review the paperwork before funds were released.

Also, in my judgment, the reporter grossly inflated monies that might be spent in the future. For example, the entire $30 million-plus budget for the Clemson Restoration Institute was listed as a Hunley expense, which is an absurd method of accounting.

The institute has been part of Clemson's planning for years, long before the Hunley was part of the equation. Clemson has committed only $2.4 million to the Hunley. In exchange, under a proposed agreement, Clemson would receive assets far exceeding their investment in the project.

Finally, the newspaper reported that nine state representatives spontaneously called for a legislative audit. Actually, the newspaper's reporters lobbied senators and House members, asking if they were willing to support a call for an audit.

Frankly, I'm surprised only nine yielded to the pressure. One House member later asked that his name be removed because he felt he had been misled by the newspaper's reports.

The truth is independent audits have been conducted every year since the project began. Those audits have found the books to be completely in order.

I have never opposed audits. The Hunley project has nothing to hide. But one reporter should not be able to manipulate the system merely to generate controversy, when the result is a needless expense to taxpayers for redundant audits.

All South Carolinians should be proud of what the Hunley project has achieved. Our state is now the permanent home of the world's first successful combat submarine.

This amazing technological creation was hidden on the bottom of the ocean for 136 years. Since 2000, we have recovered her, excavated the contents, buried her crew, made many historic discoveries and developed new technologies that promise to help preserve other artifacts and materials, like metals used in the construction of bridges and ships.

The Hunley will bring financial and cultural value to South Carolina for generations to come. And I'm proud to say we have raised over half the cost from private sources, a fact the reporter neglected to mention.

Fortunately, the Hunley has survived a great deal over the past century. I suspect she will survive a series of inaccurate press reports.

The writer, of Charleston, is president of the S.C. Senate.