Grants seen as a two-way street

'Political Favors Program' vs. giving back to community

'Political Favors Program' vs. giving back to community

$65,000 for a statue of a South Carolina football player.

$100,000 for a soccer club in Greenville.

$500,000 to a community health center with ties to a state lawmaker.

That's some of what you paid for with "competitive grants," a program in which charities, churches, municipalities and other groups make a dash for state tax dollars.

Leaders of these groups and their lawmaker sponsors say this relatively new grant system helps return tax dollars to communities and promote important causes.

Critics say it's a pork factory designed to help incumbent lawmakers curry favor with voters in their districts.

A Post and Courier examination of state grants and earmarks shows that lawmakers sometimes quietly pump money into charities and other causes with which they have family or professional ties.

During the past two years, the competitive grant program has become the preferred method of dishing out money to nonprofits and other pet projects.

Lawmakers created the program in 2005 after Gov. Mark Sanford campaigned against the practice of slipping earmarks for pet projects in the state budget.

Since then, charities, churches, municipalities and other organizations have submitted 3,000 grant applications to a panel of political appointees.

So far, this panel has handed out 460 grants worth more than $30 million.

By the end of the year, this committee could award another $18 million.

The newspaper analysis shows that sports fans have been big winners in this race.

More than $1.5 million went to grants for sports complexes, sod for ball fields, new parking spots and renovated restrooms and concession stands.

One $250,000 grant sponsored by Dan Cooper, a Piedmont lawmaker and chairman of the House Ways and Means

Committee, went to Anderson County to help construct the Dolly Cooper Sports Complex, named for Cooper's father.

Cooper argued that the Anderson County Council decided to name the sports complex after his father and drafted the application. He says he was asked to sign on as a sponsor because it was in his district.

"I didn't ask them to do it," he said. "I don't see that as a conflict. It's not my land. It's not my park. My kids aren't participating in any of those programs right now."

The nonprofit Carolina Elite Soccer Academy, the state's largest youth soccer club, received a $100,000 grant to help expand their massive private soccer complex near Greenville.

The group's co-executive director, Pearse Tormey, said the grant was more than justified because the club hosts regional tournaments that draw thousands of people to the area. "There's a huge economic impact."

The South Carolina Junior Golf Foundation located in Irmo received $50,000 for its program to teach "life skills and character development through the game of golf."

Tim Kreger, the group's director of development, explained that the program helps 1,000 children across the state.

Music fans also got their share.

A $50,000 grant went to the Beach Music Association International in North Myrtle Beach to expand Beach Music Day, and $98,000 went to the Auntie Karen Foundation based in Columbia to produce a 30-minute TV pilot to promote jazz music to young viewers.

Gardeners weren't ignored either. A $100,000 was awarded to Friends of Swan Lake Gardens in Sumter to buy a bronze sculpture.

Nor were fans of football and cotton. Another $65,000 went to the South Carolina Cotton Museum in Bishopville to buy a statue in the likeness of Felix "Doc" Blanchard, a notable South Carolina football player and 1945 recipient of the Heisman Trophy.

The grant master

As chairman of the competitive grants committee, former West Ashley lawmaker Jimmy Bailey, says he personally reviewed every one.

Bailey argues that the grants are used to spur economic growth and boost tourism by returning tax dollars to the public by funding dozens of local festivals, spending money on hometown ball fields and enabling nonprofits like the Lowcountry Food Bank to improve the quality of life.

Referring to the Dolly Cooper complex grant, Bailey said Anderson is growing economically and its residents are looking for quality of life opportunities.

"Quality of life in Charleston is the arts and the outdoors," Bailey said. "In Anderson, quality of life has a lot to do with recreational activities for young people."

So far, the largest one-time grant — $500,000 — was awarded to ReGenesis Community Health Center in Spartanburg, and the smallest two — worth $1,200 each — went toward the Cheraw Spring Fling and the July Fourth festivities in Lancaster County.

Rep. Harold Mitchell, D-Spartanburg, created ReGenesis to address health concerns stemming from pollution in the area. Mitchell is executive director of the health center's sister organization that deals with environmental concerns. However, he said, the ReGenesis health center and the environmental initiative are registered as two separate entities with the federal government and operate under the oversight of separate boards.

Mitchell said he does not work for the health center and is not on its payroll. He also noted that the health center's grant is administered by the University of South Carolina and that it receives federal funding.

Festivals and favors

Lawmakers say bringing state resources back home is part of their job. But the governor has been especially critical of the grants process.

Sanford says it's clandestine and there's nothing competitive about it. While the individual projects may have merit, he argues that the grants are given out based on a who-knows-who basis.

Chad Walldorf, chairman of the board for the S.C. Club for Growth and Sanford's former deputy chief of staff, said, "It should be more accurately named the 'Good Ol' Boy Political Favors Program.' "

During the past two years, $23,000 has gone to the South Carolina Poultry Festival — a few days of dances, parades, fireworks and games that draw about 100,000 people each year to Batesburg-Leesville.

"If we give $2,000 or $5,000 to a festival, I just don't see what the big deal is," Bailey said. "They might not be able to do it without it. If you ever go to one of these festivals, you will see how happy these people are. It's a quality of life issue."

Sanford has drawn the ire of Bailey and many lawmakers because of his condemnation of the process.

But Bailey said the governor's approach is "very transparent." If the grant program is so bad, Bailey said, Sanford should be able to convince the 170-member Legislature to stop it. And that hasn't happened.

Bailey also pointed out that Sanford wanted $150,000 for the National Governor's Association 2006 annual meeting in Charleston, which was granted.

"I see right through what they are trying to do," Bailey said. "They are trying to divert attention away from their own ineptness. I am beginning to think the governor of the state of South Carolina is a flake."

The governor's spokesman, Joel Sawyer, said the governor's meeting brought $4 million of economic impact to the Charleston area. However, it was the first grant awarded through the process and knowing what they now know, the governor might not have applied for it.

As far as the governor's criticism of the grant-making process, Sawyer added: "Mr. Bailey ought to recognize it's incredibly difficult to convince legislators to shut down their own slush fund. It's basically a honey pot for powerful legislators."

Reach Yvonne Wenger at 803-799-9051 or ywenger@ postandcourier.com. Reach Tony Bartelme at tbartelme@postandcourier.com or 937-5554.