Audit of DOT is right move

e-mail this story discuss this issue in our forums

It has been more than 20 years since the LAC conducted a comprehensive audit of the DOT. Doing so now would help resolve a high-profile dust-up between the DOT's commission chairman and its executive director. The sharp differences between commission Chairman Tee Hooper, a Greenville businessman, and Executive Director Elizabeth Mabry over how the department is run became public when Hooper released a letter recently saying that he would fire Mabry if he had the authority.

In the letter, Hooper lists what he considers to be Mabry's failures. He says the DOT has given its top administrators pricey SUVs and engaged in questionable travel spending by paying for 260 staffers to attend a Myrtle Beach conference. His most serious charge involves an alleged failure to recoup $145 million in federal highway money to which this cash-strapped state is entitled. Those are the types of operational and managerial failures the LAC is experienced in assessing.

Since the letter's release, the political fallout has been considerable, with the governor supporting an audit and several lawmakers and DOT commissioners coming to Mabry's defense publicly. Last week, a majority of DOT commissioners held a closed-door, unannounced meeting. The hasty meeting may have violated the state's Freedom of Information Act regarding public meetings. It is illegal for a public body to convene and discuss public business without notifying the public well in advance. According to Greenville News reporter Tim Smith, matters previously before the commission were discussed. And at a later meeting Mabry was given a vote of confidence.

The DOT has long been considered one of state government's better-run agencies. Just last week, the state DOT was rated the nation's third most cost-efficient state highway agency in an annual survey conducted by the University of North Carolina-Charlotte. It's a familiar perch for the DOT. Since 1990, the agency has always been at or near the top.

Reputation aside, the state has a responsibility to delve into such serious charges when they are made by someone as close to the agency as Hooper.

Getting the LAC involved requires either a request by five lawmakers or an individual request by the speaker of the House or the president pro tempore of the Senate. A citizen panel decides which audit requests to honor.

Lawmakers who have jumped to Mabry's defense can vindicate her by calling on the LAC, which has proven it will follow the facts wherever they might lead.