HSB 648

34, providing alternative bidding procedures for state board of regents public improvements, is repealed. _____ statement with the governmental entity showing the bidder’s financial standing, equipment, and experience in similar work.9, regarding award of contract, is amended to allow a governmental entity to reject a bid if the bidder has not performed in accordance with the terms of another contract for a public improvement.21 allows a governmental entity to use an alternative project delivery contract in circumstances that normally require the governmental entity to use competitive bidding procedures. Currently, most governmental entities must use a competitive bidding process as outlined in Code chapter for a public improvement construction project. The bill defines an alternative project delivery contract as a design-build contract and allows for the selection and awarding of a design-build contract under either a two-phase, best-value, or low-bid design-build selection process. The bill defines a design-build contract as a contract between a governmental entity and a design-builder to furnish the architecture of record, engineering of record, and related services as required for a given public project, and to furnish the labor, materials, and other construction services for the same public project.1B.1B.1B is amended to provide the mechanism for adjusting these threshold amounts. Under both design-build contract processes, a governmental entity may retain a bridging criteria professional to advise the governmental entity on design-build matters. _____ proposals for a design-build contract, to include a design bridging criteria package detailing necessary elements for the public improvement. If the two-phase, best-value process is used, the governmental entity shall first score the technical proposals submitted by design-builders. Then, the governmental entity shall examine the sealed price proposals for each design-builder and calculate an adjusted score by dividing each design-builder’s price by that design-builder’s technical score. The bill provides a mechanism to adjust the sealed price submitted by a design-builder if a time factor is included in the selection criteria. The bill then provides that unless all proposals are rejected, the governmental entity shall award the contract to the responsive and responsible design-builder with the lowest adjusted score. The bill allows the governmental entity to provide a stipend to each design-builder who submitted a proposal but was not awarded the contract. If the low-bid design-build selection process is used, design-builders shall simultaneously submit their technical and sealed price proposals. The bill provides that the governmental entity shall establish measurable evaluation criteria for the project. The governmental entity shall first review the technical proposal to determine whether the proposal meets the minimum standards established through the evaluation criteria. Following review and evaluation of the technical proposal, the governmental entity shall only review the price proposals from bidders that meet the minimum requirements for the project and award the contract to the bidder that submits a proposal that meets or exceeds the evaluation criteria with the lowest price. The bill provides that an alternative project delivery contract shall not be authorized for projects relating to highway, bridge, or culvert construction.