Bill Text: NJ S889 | 2014-2015 | Regular Session | Introduced
Bill Title: Requires State Treasurer, in consultation with State Comptroller, to promulgate rules and regulations concerning best practices for awarding independent State authority contracts.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 1-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2014-01-14 - Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate State Government, Wagering, Tourism & Historic Preservation Committee [S889 Detail]
Download: New_Jersey-2014-S889-Introduced.html
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
216th LEGISLATURE
PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2014 SESSION
Sponsored by:
Senator JENNIFER BECK
District 11 (Monmouth)
SYNOPSIS
Requires State Treasurer, in consultation with State Comptroller, to promulgate rules and regulations concerning best practices for awarding independent State authority contracts.
CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT
Introduced Pending Technical Review by Legislative Counsel
An Act concerning purchases, contracts, or agreements by independent State authorities and supplementing Title 52 of the Revised Statutes.
Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:
1. As used in this act:
"Executive director" means the executive or administrative head.
"Independent State authority" or "authority" means a public authority, board, commission, corporation, or other agency or instrumentality of the State allocated in, but not of, a principal department of State government pursuant to Article V, Section IV, paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution, or which is not subject to supervision or control by the department in which it is allocated, and a regional authority, but shall not include a college or university.
"Regional authority" means and includes the Passaic Valley sewerage commissioners and the North Jersey district water supply commission.
2. a. All purchases, contracts, or agreements (hereinafter "contracts") made or awarded by an independent State authority, except as provided in section 3 of this act, shall comply with the rules and regulations adopted by the State Treasurer pursuant to subsection b. of this section.
b. The State Treasurer, in consultation with the State Comptroller, shall adopt rules and regulations, pursuant to the "Administrative Procedure Act," P.L.1968, c.410 (C.52:14B-1 et seq.) concerning best practices for the procurement of goods and services through contracts made or awarded by independent State authorities, which practices shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(1) Ensuring that the pool of prospective bidders reached by advertising is as expansive as possible;
(2) Ensuring that the eligibility requirements for a vendor seeking to compete for a contract are limited only by concerns related to the vendor's responsibility;
(3) Ensuring that requests for bids contain a clear and detailed statement of work to be undertaken, and that the authority includes a clear, complete, and specific statement of work in the final executed contract with the vendor, both of which emphasize the result to be achieved, rather than detailing the process for accomplishing that goal;
(4) Ensuring that bid submissions are judged on the basis of predetermined, merit-based evaluative criteria, which are made known to vendors before bids are submitted and disclosed to prospective bidders as early as possible in the procurement process through the request for proposals or bids, or other solicitation document;
(5) Ensuring that weighing of evaluative criteria is used if some criteria are determined to be more important than others. The weight assigned to each criterion generally should be disclosed in the request for bids;
(6) Ensuring that the evaluative criteria are judged by a qualified evaluation committee that is established before bids are received and is sufficiently qualified to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the bids submitted. Potential evaluation committee members should be screened meticulously for conflicts of interest;
(7) Ensuring that the evaluation process should be explainable to evaluators and competing vendors and capable of withstanding scrutiny under a protest challenge, and that the meaning of each criterion and the reason for its inclusion as part of the evaluative analysis is explained to evaluators before judging;
(8) Ensuring that each member of the qualified evaluation committee scores each bid and provides comments that explain the score assigned to each criterion;
(9) Ensuring that every step in the evaluative process is documented through scoring sheets, a written record of what transpired during any permitted negotiations between vendors and procurement officials, a written comparative analysis of competing bid proposals, and a written award recommendation;
(10) Ensuring that the written award recommendation explains the factors that led to the award decision, offers qualitative discussion of the leading competing bid proposals, and describes the specific characteristics of the winning vendor's bid proposal that resulted in its selection over the others; and
(11) Ensuring that records of the scoring process and award recommendations are retained for the period of time set by the authority.
3. a. Any contract may be made, negotiated or awarded by the authority without reference to the rules and regulations adopted pursuant to subsection b. of section 2 of this act under the following circumstances:
(1) The aggregate amount involved does not exceed the amount set forth in, or the amount calculated by the Governor pursuant to, section 2 of P.L.1954, c.48 (C.52:34-7), unless other provisions of law set a lower amount in a particular case, in which case the lower amount shall apply. An authority may not divide a contract into multiple proposed contracts in order to take advantage of this exception and shall, if invoking this exception, certify that it has done so and maintain a record of that certification. However, to the extent that it is feasible to do so, each authority shall advertise and employ a competitive process of some type even for contracts below the minimum amount established pursuant to this paragraph. This competitive process may include obtaining telephone quotations or obtaining written quotations following more limited advertising. The process shall be memorialized in the certification referred to above.
(2) In cases of unforeseen life, safety, or health emergencies in which the public exigency requires that services or products be purchased immediately, as demonstrated by the memorialized concurrence of three officials of the authority who have been designated in advance to make such determinations. The authority shall make efforts to contract in advance to deal with the types of emergencies which typically arise. The contract permitted under this paragraph shall be limited to purchasing those services or products necessary to mitigate the emergency situation.
(3) In cases in which there is only one vendor capable or available to provide the goods or services, which shall only be in exceptional circumstances and only when necessary. When an authority invokes this exception, an officer designated by the authority shall write and sign a memorandum justifying the exception.
(4) Where the contract is with the federal government or any State government or agency or political subdivision thereof.
(5) Where a firm brings an innovative idea to the authority, and a request for proposals cannot be constructed without communicating the new idea and the procurement will not benefit from a competitive selection process.
(6) Where State or federal law requires a different process than set forth in this act or the regulations adopted thereunder. In the event of a conflict between this act and other provisions of State or federal law, the latter shall prevail.
(7) Where the authority receives written authorization from the Governor's Authorities Unit.
b. Where one of the exceptions listed in subsection a. of this section is invoked, the proposed resolution concerning the contract shall set forth the justification for invoking the exception and the authority's executive director shall certify that circumstances warrant application of the exception.
c. This act shall not affect the prescribed method of bond sales set forth in Executive Order No. 26 of 1994, or the audit requirements set forth in Executive Order No. 122 of 2004, as amended by Executive Order No. 37 of 2006.
d. The Treasurer, in consultation with the State Comptroller, shall review the rules and regulations adopted pursuant to subsection b. of section 2 of this act at least once every two years after the date of their initial adoption, and make any revisions necessary to ensure that current best practices in the making or awarding of contracts are followed by all independent State authorities.
4. This act shall take effect immediately.
STATEMENT
This bill requires the State Treasurer, in consultation with the State Comptroller, to adopt rules and regulations concerning best practices for purchases, contracts, or agreements made or awarded by independent State authorities. These best practices shall include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) Ensuring that the pool of vendors solicited is as expansive as possible;
(2) Ensuring that the eligibility requirements for a vendor seeking to compete for a contract are limited only by concerns related to the vendor's responsibility;
(3) Ensuring that requests for proposals contain a clear and detailed statement of work to be undertaken, and that the authority includes a clear, complete, and specific statement of work in the final executed contract with the vendor, both of which emphasize the result to be achieved, rather than detailing the process for accomplishing that goal;
(4) Ensuring that proposals are judged on the basis of predetermined, merit-based evaluative criteria, which are made known to vendors before proposals are submitted and disclosed to prospective vendors as early as possible in the procurement process through the request for proposals or bids, or other solicitation document;
(5) Ensuring that weighing of evaluative criteria is used if some criteria are determined to be more important than others. The weight assigned to each criterion generally should be disclosed in the request for proposals;
(6) Ensuring that the evaluative criteria are judged by a qualified evaluation committee that is established before proposals are received and is sufficiently qualified to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the bids or proposals submitted. Potential evaluation committee members should be screened meticulously for conflicts of interest;
(7) Ensuring that the evaluation process should be explainable to evaluators and competing vendors and capable of withstanding scrutiny under a protest challenge, and that the meaning of each criterion and the reason for its inclusion as part of the evaluative analysis is explained to evaluators before judging;
(8) Ensuring that each member of the qualified evaluation committee scores each proposal and provides comments that explain the score assigned to each criterion;
(9) Ensuring that every step in the evaluative process is documented through scoring sheets, a written record of what transpired during any permitted negotiations between vendors and procurement officials, a written comparative analysis of competing bids or proposals, and a written award recommendation;
(10) Ensuring that the written award recommendation explains the factors that led to the award decision, offers qualitative discussion of the leading competing bids or proposals, and describes the specific characteristics of the winning vendor's bid or proposal that resulted in its selection over the others; and
(11) Ensuring that records of the scoring process and award recommendations are retained for the period of time set by the authority.
The bill provides for exceptions from the rules and regulations, based upon the exceptions contained in Executive Order No. 37 of 2006. The bill also provides that in the event of a conflict between the bill's provisions and the regulations adopted thereunder and other State or federal laws, the latter shall prevail.
The bill implements suggestions made in a report issued by the State Comptroller on March 4, 2010, entitled "Best Practices for Awarding Service Contracts."
