WIS News 10 - Columbia, South Carolina | State House security a hot topic among WIS viewers

State House security a hot topic among WIS viewers

COLUMBIA, SC (WIS) - It's a building you've probably visited. Maybe as a tourist, for a field trip or even as a protestor.

But if you take a closer look, you will find cameras, metal detectors and other measures to keep the building secure.

Millions of taxpayer dollars were spent to bolster protection at the State House complex.
    
Lawmakers and public safety officials say the dramatic security upgrade is necessary in a time of terrorism.
    
The state's chief executive says the money has been wasted, and the system doesn't work.

It is the center of state government, towering over Columbia for a century and a half.

Withstanding war, economic calamity and all kinds of storms -- including the political ones.

And still, public safety leaders and lawmakers were convinced the South Carolina State House and the buildings around it needed more protection.

"I think since 2001, all levels of government -- federal, local, state had to revisit the way they secured their buildings and their personnel and their visitors," said Sen. Joel Lourie.

So, two years ago the General Assembly set aside millions for a multi-faceted security system now surrounding the State House complex with concrete and steel barriers, guard posts, warning signs, electronic surveillance and metal detectors at main entrances.

Anyone trying to enter the parking garage under the office buildings must pass checkpoints not unlike those at Fort Jackson.

If someone tries to rush past the guard house on Pendleton Street, their car could smash into a wedge that pops up from under the plate in the entry lane.

Are these measures really necessary?

"Absolutely not. And this is just a colossal waste of money," says Gov. Mark Sanford.

Sanford says lawmakers blew six million dollars on security that simply wasn't needed.

In a letter to the budget and control board, Sanford writes, "with the exception of Sherman's march through this town, our State House has stood fine for nearly the last 150 years. I have no doubt that if we geared down on the present wastes of taxpayer money on supposed 'security,' it would continue just fine."

"If this is about supposedly keeping a jihadist from blowing up Senate and House members, executive branch. The first thing you've got to look at is level of threat. And the reality is, with all due respect to South Carolina -- which is again home, I love it. We're not on the radar screen like a New York City or San Francisco," says Sanford.

Lawmakers say Sanford is the one who needs to get real.

"This really has nothing to do with protecting the individual members of the legislature. We're there three days a week, five months out of the year. It's about protecting the foundation of government, the State House capitol, the capitol complex, the employees that work there five days a week, 40 to 50 hours a week, and the visitors," says Sen. Lourie.
    
Sanford says with state revenues now plummeting, taxpayers can't afford the extra security.

Especially, he says, if it doesn't deliver.

The governor says the gate on Sumter Street provides a perfect example of just how ineffective the system is.

It is supposed to restrict access to a parking lot, but while we were there the lights weren't on, the gate was always in the up position and there was no one there to check who was going out or coming in.

Another gate nearby separates the parking lot from a sidewalk. That control arm was also left up.

Many state employees ridicule the system, especially those issued electronic ID cards to enter the garage.

We saw why. Time and time again, the device that's supposed to read the cards and automatically raise those control arms failed to recognize the cards.

Often a security guard had to take the card from a driver and wave it in front of the sensor. Sometimes that didn't work, and the guard had to raise the gate manually.

John Crangle, a lobbyist for the government watchdog group Common Cause and a 22-year veteran of the State House scene.

"The only time that there seemed to be some concern about security was when the Iraq war started in 1991. They took additional security measures at that time. But since then I haven't really heard any conversation indicating that anyone felt there was a serious security problem at the state house complex," says John Crangle, a lobbyist for the government watchdog group Common Cause and a 22-year veteran of the State House scene.

"There is no security. So you're paying six million dollars so that people in politics can say there was some added upgrade so they felt like they did something. But that is the perfect case of bureaucracy run amok wherein there is no result," says Sanford.

"I'm not going to tell you it's perfect but anytime you implement a new program there are going to be problems," says Lourie.

Problems that include a Corrections Department recycling truck colliding with the gate behind the Calhoun Building. The result was an employee in a golf cart assigned to watch the parking lot until the gate could be repaired.

And one of those Pendleton Street control arms we talked about earlier is now missing, snapped off by a vehicle heading to the underground garage.

The Department of Public Safety says the arm came down on a state worker's car even though the driver had a green light.

Sanford has criticized spending on the State House security project for more than a year. And last week, Budget and Control seemed to have had enough.

In a letter, the board's executive director tells Sanford, "It appears you are unaware that your office recommended increasing spending to hire guards for this project."
     
A Sanford spokesman says it is true. In his 2007-2008 budget proposal, the governor called for $156,000 in new spending to hire five new security officers for the capitol complex.
    
Lawmakers approved four, and Sanford signed the appropriations into law.

Executive Director Frank Fusco also tells Sanford the board does not make appropriations decisions, or assign or deploy Bureau of Protective Services personnel. Fusco also says the design of the security system "has been driven by the state's public safety community, not the Board."

Fusco cites a 2005 memorandum from then-Director of Public Safety James Schweitzer recommending that "manned law enforcement posts should be used to strictly control access to the parking garage."

Schweitzer, according the memo, also recommended that all deliveries to the capitol complex be monitored and controlled, and that all employees at the State House should be issued "controlled identification."  
    
Sanford spokesman Joel Sawyer says the governor's staff thought the extra officers requested in the 2007-2008 budget would patrol the capitol grounds, not sit in guard houses watching traffic.
    
He says the governor has since tried to scale back spending on what Sawyer calls the "six-million-dollar boondoggle."

Reported by Jack Kuenzie

Posted by Logan Smith