Gov. Mark Sanford last week repeated his call for the DOT to be placed under his control. His statement followed release of a Legislative Audit Council report highly critical of the DOT.

Among other findings, the audit stated the agency has wasted millions of dollars on contracts, paid too much for consultants and spent $9 million for work that was never completed.

Despite criticism from many quarters, including the DOT chair himself, a Sanford appointee, the department has been subjected to little scrutiny, especially for a 5,000-employee state agency with a $1 billion budget.

That may change. Last week two legislative committees heard from the auditors who drafted the report, as well as from Elizabeth Mabry, DOT executive director.

Mabry defended her agency by pointing out that the waste described by auditors amounted to less than 1 percent of the DOT budget. She also flatly denied several allegations. On one, dealing with the timeliness of filing for federal reimbursements, the director was backed by a federal highway administrator. On another, she said the state saved money by bringing in consultants to handle a spurt of road projects

We think the DOT director makes good points, and we urge legislators not to be too quick to cite the audit as reason to toss out the baby with the bath water.

At the same time, DOT and the commission that oversees it are overdue for restructuring. With the exception of the commission chair, whom the governor chooses, members are appointed by the General Assembly from the state's six congressional districts. In theory, this ensures an equitable distribution of resources statewide. In practice, over the years commissioners have grabbed as much gold as they could for their own county while the getting was good.

Sanford can make a good case that the DOT director should be a department head, answering to the chief executive. Whether the General Assembly, which jealously guards its authority and seldom agrees with Sanford, will buy that is highly doubtful.

Whatever restructuring emerges, the impact will be minimal until legislators provide the money to eliminate the backlog of road and bridge projects in this state -- more than $1.5 billion the last we heard. The most practical way to do that is to raise the state gasoline tax and not allow that revenue to be diverted to other uses.

But with a libertarian governor and a no-tax-pledge Legislature, motorists shouldn't hold their breath.

IN SUMMARY
Restructuring the S.C. Department of Transportation is a good idea, but a better one would be raising the gasoline tax so state roads and bridges can be repaired.