Major Highway Projects Reform - Legislative
Audit Bureau Report
For years, citizens and various public interest groups have questioned
the state’s spending on highway expansion projects. In February
2003, Senator Carol Roessler (R-Oshkosh) and Representative Suzanne Jeskewitz
(R-Menomonee Falls), co-chairs of the Legislature’s Joint Committee
on Audits, led their committee to request a Legislative Audit Bureau investigation
of the Major Highway Projects program.
As one of the first groups invited to give input to the Legislative Audit
Bureau, 1000 Friends of Wisconsin focused on sharing with the Legislative
Audit Bureau the findings of our March 2003 legislative briefing booklet, Exceeding
the Limit: WisDOT and Transportation Financing in Wisconsin. The
request for an audit could not have been better timed since one of the key
findings in the booklet was that, historically, there has been a lack of
transparency in how WisDOT spends state funds.
1000 Friends of Wisconsin concluded that the lack of access to information
inhibits the public’s ability to understand how its tax dollars are
being spent and that an audit of WisDOT was needed. Additional findings
in the briefing booklet that were relevant to the audit included indications
1) that spending on Major Highway Projects was out-of-control, particularly
in relation to spending on repair and maintenance work, and 2) that the
approval process for Major Highway Projects, generally a proxy for highway
expansion, amounted to little more than a rubber-stamp.
Audit Findings
When the Legislative Audit Bureau released its
report in late November many of our biggest concerns were confirmed, and
some new concerns were created, while other questions remained unanswered. The
key finding of the audit was that cost overruns on just seven Major Highway
Projects, six of which were enumerated between 1989 and 1995, totaled $381
million dollars. Cost overruns on one project alone reached $86 million,
evidencing seriously out-of-control spending. The audit also found
that a potential savings of $382 million on remaining Major Highway Projects
has not been realized because ‘value engineering,’ a cost-benefit
analysis process, has not been sufficiently implemented. Also, arguments
that environmental regulations are driving up the costs on highway projects
appear to be overblown.
Meanwhile, questions about how Major Highway
Projects spending compares to spending on highway repair and highway maintenance,
as well as to aids to local governments and funding for alternative modes,
remain unsatisfactorily answered. We believe these questions should
be addressed in future audits.
|