Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers weigh adjustments to procurement thresholds, master-contract authorities
Summary
The committee examined a trio of procurement bills that would change vehicle-advertising thresholds for Garrett County, clarify indefinite-quantity contract authority statewide, and bar agencies from collecting program fees before final regulations unless adopted as emergency rules.
Multiple procurement-related proposals drew committee attention during the hearing.
Delegate Jim Hinebaugh asked for a favorable report on House Bill 13-34, a local bill to raise Garrett County’s vehicle-advertising threshold from $50,000 to $100,000 and to allow multi-award contracts for as-needed purchases (asphalt, salt) without repeated advertisement when quantities vary during the contract term. Hinebaugh said the change mirrors prior authorization granted to Washington County and would streamline local procurement.
Delegate Chris Tomlinson presented House Bill 6-62 to clarify that indefinite-quantity (master) contracts may be used across procurement methods (not only A&E), standardizing state practice and reducing uncertainty. Tomlinson said federal practice (FAR Title 48) also allows indefinite-quantity contracts and that the amendment negotiated with DGS captures intended uses and aligns practice across agencies.
Delegate John Howard presented House Bill 12-79 (state agency adoption of regulations required) — a parity bill that would prohibit a state unit required by law to adopt regulations to provide an authorized program from collecting fees under that program until final regulations have been adopted, with an exception for emergency regulations. Howard said the bill creates parity with the business community and prevents agencies from charging fees before implementation rules are finalized; agencies raised timing concerns and the sponsor agreed to follow-up with offices that submitted letters.
Nut graf: Proponents argued the bills reduce duplicative procedures, harmonize state procurement practice with federal and local practice, and protect businesses and residents from premature fee collection. Agencies raised practical concerns including compliance tools and timing; sponsors negotiated or agreed to continue working with agencies and stakeholders on targeted amendments.
Key clarifications Tomlinson said his amendment was drafted with DGS and committee counsel; an earlier unfavorable testimony from a contractors’ association shifted to neutral after discussion. Delegate Howard agreed to follow up with the attorney general’s office and other agencies that submitted written concerns about HB 12-79, and accepted adding an emergency-regulation exception to preserve necessary fee collections for background checks and similar measures.
Ending: Sponsors asked for favorable reports while assuring the committee they would continue to work with agencies and stakeholders to refine technical language. No formal votes were taken in the hearing.
