Donating to charity is supposed to be a fuzzy, feel-good experience.

Not only are you lending a helping hand, but some studies suggest you could also be improving your own well-being.

This hasn’t been the case at Honolulu Hale. A protracted political debateover which nonprofits are worthy of taxpayer subsidies has soured relationships inside city hall. It’s also raised questions about equity and fairness.

On Wednesday, the Honolulu City Council approved giving just over $5.1 million in grants to 52 nonprofits around Oahu. Some of the beneficiaries include Hawaii Meals on Wheels, Pacific Islands Fisheries Group and the Domestic Violence Action Center.

But due to some last minute fiscal gerrymandering by Council Chair Ernie Martin, many of those groups will be getting less money than anticipated.

The funding comes from the city’s newly created Grants-in-Aid program, which was approved by voters in November 2012. That provision set aside 0.5 percent of the city’s general fund revenues that can only be used as grant funds for charities and other nonprofits.

In August, the Honolulu Grants-in-Aid Advisory Commission — which was created to vet applicants seeking city funds — announced which nonprofits would be receiving funds, using a grading mechanism to rate each charity.

The City Council was set to approve that list Wednesday, which would have given the $5.1 million to 41 nonprofits. But instead the council approved an alternative resolution developed by Martin that expanded the number of charities that would benefit under the program by taking money away from the others already selected by the grants commission.

Martin’s proposal essentially skimmed 25 percent off the top of the commission’s recommendations and divided those funds — about $1.2 million — among 11 other nonprofits that didn’t quite make the commission’s cut in August.

It was a controversial move, and one that elicited complaints from both the Caldwell administration and nonprofit executives who said it would cause budgetary headaches and hinder the ability to effectively provide services.

Martin, however, was unconvinced. He said the city can’t start giving out money until Jan. 1. The administration and council can also insert extra funds into the budget in the next fiscal year to cover the balance for those charities that were anticipating more.

“I wish we could fund more, I think we all agree on that,” Martin said during the meeting. “(But) these are not existing funds that (the nonprofits) have gotten in the past. It was nothing that they were dependent on in the past. These are new funds that they would not have had the opportunity to even have if not for this council passing the charter amendment to which the voters approved.”

Martin introduced the charter amendment resolution that ultimately created the city’s Grants-in-Aid fund. He has long had a soft spot for providing money for charities and other social programs, and at one time led the city’s Department of Community Services, which oversaw grant programs for needy populations.

But Martin is also a politician, and he made a point of once again needling Mayor Kirk Caldwell over his decision to withhold $8 million that council members had earmarked for the nonprofits of their choosing.

These funds garnered a lot of attention during this year’s budget deliberations. Caldwell publicly criticized the council for inserting the money into his budget, saying it was fiscally irresponsible to do so, especially after refusing to pass his gas tax.

He was also concerned about the lack of oversight. At least with the Grants-in-Aid program, he said, there was an independent commission that reviewed who was receiving taxpayer dollars.

Caldwell’s stance on the earmarks — not to mention his decision to withhold the funds — was definitely a factor in Martin’s decision to move funds around in the Grants-in-Aid program. But Martin also said he likely would have shifted the money around anyway given the fact that it won’t be distributed until halfway through the current fiscal year.

“In this particular instance we adhered to the commission’s recommendations,” Martin said. “All we did was move the line … further down so more agencies could benefit. We were able to fund 11 more projects. If I had my choice I’d fund them all, except for the ones that probably didn’t do a good job putting forth a rational explanation as to why it was necessary for them to be given public funds.”

Councilman Breene Harimoto was the only one to vote against Martin’s Grants-in-Aid funding proposal. Harimoto was the first council member to speak out against the earmarks his colleagues had inserted in the mayor’s budget.

On Wednesday, he said he shared the same concerns as the administration and other nonprofit providers. He also worried that Martin’s proposal shortchanged his district, which includes Aiea, Pearlridge and Waipahu.

Caldwell declined to comment on the council’s actions regarding the Grants-in-Aid program. His spokesman, Jesse Broder Van Dyke, said the mayor has already made his opinions on the matter clear. Broder Van Dyke reiterated that Caldwell has no intention of releasing any of the $8 million in earmarks the council inserted into the budget.