PIERRE - A veteran South Dakota lawmaker says the 2009 Legislature faces "a mind-boggling" problem in trying to come up with money to keep the state's highways and bridges in shape.

State Rep. Jim Putnam of Armour, who helps lead the Legislature's budget committee, says things will be even worse if the federal economic crisis hasn't eased by the time South Dakota lawmakers convene in early January.

"When you see a number that says it would take $72 million more each year just to maintain the pavement as it is, you start to see the magnitude," Putnam said. "There's no doubt about it being a mind-boggling problem."

A special committee has reviewed the needs and reports that $72.3 million in additional funding is needed each year to keep roads in good shape and $17.4 million to preserve bridges.

Republican Rep. Hal Wick, R-Sioux Falls, said the committee can't make firm decisions until it has some idea of what the federal economy will do. It might not know that in time for the 2009 Legislature - much less the highway funding committee's next meeting Nov. 12-13, he said.

"We need to keep pressing on, to look for possibilities, but we can't make any decisions at this point because I think it's too early to really tell where things are going to go," Wick said.

The per-gallon gas tax would have to be raised almost 13 cents to get $72.3 million for roads.

The state has dedicated its gas tax to highways and bridges since the 1930s. The tax now is 22 cents a gallon for regular and 20 cents for ethanol blends.

Officials say alternative fuels and drivers' conservation efforts have hurt the fund balance.

Officials say one option would be adding a 4 percent sales tax to the purchase of fuel.

Lawmakers on the highway needs committee didn't endorse any particular approach.

Some lawmakers favor a closer look at the DOT.

"We have not evaluated how we are functioning within DOT, with how we are spending those dollars," said Rep. Kristie Noem, R-Castlewood. "We've not seen any gross misrepresentation, but I think that's something we could look at before we jump in and start assessing more taxes to the people."

Any new or increased revenue source would require a two-thirds vote in the Legislature.

"We have to show the need to come up with a tax increase or whatever it is because, in the end, regardless of what we call it, if you're going to raise more money, you're talking about a tax increase," said Sen. Jim Peterson, D-Revillo.