Posted on Sun, May. 21, 2006

email this

print this

reprint or license this

Sub funds should be questioned

ISSAC J. BAILEY

A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE

State Sen. Glenn McConnell, R-Charleston, may need a title more befitting a man of the stature he reportedly has. How about King McConnell?

That's the impression from a series of articles by The (Columbia) State about the funding of the H.L. Hunley project. Here's what McConnell told me about the detailed report, which raised disturbing questions about how special projects are funded:

"That article makes it sound like we are loading money out of the state treasurer, and we are not," he said. "All of this is public records."

He said no money has been misappropriated and the state hasn't put operating funds into the project in five years. He said he doesn't carte blanche to funnel public money - though many people believe he is arguably the most powerful elected official in the state.

Here's a recap of the paper's reporting:

McConnell, using his unmatched power in the legislature, has helped to steer about $97 million in mostly public funding - federal, local and state - to his pet project, including for a museum for which there has been no feasibility study.

"Not counting university expansion projects, the Hunley ranks behind only a few large road and bridge projects," the paper said.

About 90 percent of the funding is public money, including major projects by Clemson University and the museum in North Charleston.

But it seems the public has lost interest in the first submarine to sink a ship during a war. The Hunley lab had 276,000 fee-paying visitors in its first year and just 37,000 last year, according to the paper. McConnell said tourism revenue at the lab increased $12,000 in 2005 versus 2004.

Also, a Hunley replica the Burroughs & Chapin Co. Inc. built at Broadway at the Beach, one of the state's top tourist attractions, never caught on. And experts have debunked many of the claims about the Hunley's importance to submarine technology. In other words, taxpayers are expected to fund a project that may end up turning into a money pit.

I wanted to know if the articles caused concern in the governor's office and for our local senators.

What I found saddened me. It is clear that the people with whom I spoke, as well as the quotes from senators I read in The State newspaper, don't plan to uphold their duty to make sure the public isn't being had. They don't plan to push for a public, independent investigation to prove such a large sum of money.

Sen. Luke Rankin did not respond. The governor's office responded, but only tepidly.

"Independent of the merits or demerits of the Hunley project as a whole, the governor has said that the questions raised by this report are symptomatic of a larger issue within state government," spokesman Joel Sawyer answered through e-mail. "People of this state deserve a full accounting of how their tax dollars are spent - and that goes for all of state government, not just this project."

the governor isn't doing anything to make sure there will be a public accounting.

Sen. Dick Elliott said the Hunley is important to the state's history and that McConnell is an honorable man.

Why "squibble over an extreme cost?" while trying to preserve a treasured artifact, Elliott said. "Who else in this entire state could use a hodgepodge of funding methods ... to keep the funding for [our] heritage alive? We should be thanking the man."

"Should there be a formal public accounting of the project's cost and would you support it?" I asked.

"I don't think Sen. McConnell would have sought money to waste money," he answered.

"Is the Hunley project worth the reported $97 million?" I asked.

"Who knows what is a fair price," Elliott answered.

He said he and other senators did not know McConnell approached Clemson University and other public entities for funding.

If the project is worth the cost, why not make sure there is a formal accounting of how the funding came to be?

"There are safeguards in place" to make sure projects are done ethically, Elliott answered. At least five members of the General Assembly can ask for a deeper investigation, he said.

There is something wrong - something very wrong - when the people we send to Columbia to protect our best interests don't feel bothered enough to do so.

ONLINE | For past columns and to read Bailey's blog, go to MyrtleBeachOnline.com.