Skip to main content

SC House passes DOT Reform Measure

The SC House has recently passed a reform bill on SCDOT by a 104-3 margin. The bill moves to the Senate where the bill could possibly stall.

The push to reform SCDOT is a result of an agency audit that showed mismanagement of over $50 million in funds and also testimony that two DOT employees were ordered to hide cash balances. As a result of the audit and inquiry; last December, then SCDOT Executive Elizabeth Mabry resigned.

Although the bill passed the House nearly unanimously, there were some reservations. Most of the reservations came from how the members of the Highway commission would be seated. Under the bill, there would be seven commissioners - one for each highway engineering district. The commissioner candidates would have to go through a screening panel and then elected by a joint session of the legislature.

Currently, there are six commissioners - determined by US Congressional Districts - elected by lawmakers within their districts, and there is not a screening panel.

Proposals to have the seven members elected by lawmakers within their district, and one to totally abolish the DOT commissioners were shelved.

Some legislators are worried that urban areas will have more of a say than rural districts in a joint session approval.

The bill now moves to the state Senate where the body has worked on their own version of a DOT reform bill for the past three weeks.

The Reform Bill Main Points:
  • Gives the Governor the power to appoint a Secretary of Transportation which would be seated in his cabinet.
  • The Secretary would have the power to propose DOT strategies and priorities. The Commission would approve these, but will not have the power to change them.
  • The commission would increase from six to seven members. The members would come from each of the DOT's Engineering Districts.
  • The commissioner must live in the district and have transportation related experience.

Story Link:
House passes DOT reform bill ---Myrtle Beach Sun News

Commentary:
The reform bill has some I-73 supporters nervous, as they worry that the new panel or Secretary will move I-73 off the top of the priority list. Also, the bill will put the DOT under more control of the Governor. However, the DOT will still have a great deal of autonomy as the Governor will have no input on the commissioners. The independence of SCDOT was one thing former Executive Directory Mabry fought for strongly.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Legend of the Ridge Route; a history of crossing the mountains between the Los Angeles Basin and San Joaquin Valley from wagon trails to Interstates

Over the past two decades I've crossed the Interstate 5 corridor from Los Angeles north over the Sierra Pelona Mountains and Tehachapi Range to San Joaquin Valley what seems to be an immeasurable number of times.  While Interstate 5 from Castaic Junction to Grapevine via Tejon Pass today is known to most as "The Grapevine" it occupies a corridor which has been traversed by numerous historic highways.  The most notable of these highways is known as the "Ridge Route."  This article is dedicated to the Ridge Route and the various highways that preceded it.  This blog is part of the larger Gribblenation US Route 99 Page.  For more information pertaining to the other various segments of US Route 99 and it's three-digit child routes check out the link the below. Gribblenation US Route 99 Page Ridge Route corridor introdution The Ridge Route as originally envisioned was a segment of highway which was completed in 1915 between the northern Los Angeles city limit

Establishing the numbering conventions of California's chargeable Interstates

The Federal Highway Aid Act of 1956 brought the Interstate Highway System into existence which would largely be constructed by Federal Highway Administration fund matching.  The Interstate Highway System was deliberately numbered to run opposite the established conventions of the US Route System.  While the Interstate Highway numbering conventions are now well established there was a period during the late 1950s where they were still being finalized.  This blog examines the history of the establishing of the chargeable Interstate Highway route numbers in California.  The above blog cover depicts the Interstate Highway route numbers requested by the Division of Highways in the Los Angeles area during November 1957.  The establishment of the numbering conventions of California's chargeable Interstates The Interstate Highway System was not created in a vacuum by way of the passage of the 1956 Federal Highway Aid Act.  The beginning of the Interstate Highway System can be found in the

California State Route 210 (legacy of California State Route 30)

  California State Route 210 is a forty-mile-long limited access State Highway located in Los Angeles County and San Bernardino County.  California State Route 210 exists as a non-Interstate continuation of Interstate 210 and the Foothill Freeway between California State Route 57 in San Dimas east to Interstate 10 Redlands.  California State Route 210 was previously designated as California State Route 30 until the passage of 1998 Assembly Bill 2388, Chapter 221.  Since 2009 the entirety of what was California State Route 30 has been signed as California State Route 210 upon the completion of the Foothill Freeway extension.  Below westbound California State Route 210 can be seen crossing the Santa Ana River as the blog cover.  California State Route 30 can be seen for the last time on the 2005 Caltrans Map below.  Part 1; the evolution of California State Route 30 into California State Route 210 What was to become California State Route 30 (CA 30) entered the State Highway System duri