|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ch. 13
|
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
LAWS OF MARYLAND
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These same provisions of present Art. 41, §§ 231N et
seq., as they relate to the General Professional Services
Selection Board and the procurement of architectural and
engineering services by other state agencies, are revised
to conform with this subtitle and are retained in Article
41.
Present Art. 41, §231X, which provides that the
subtitle does not affect the validity of contracts
existing on July 1, 1974, is deleted as obsolete; in this
regard, see, also, Section 12 of Ch.___, Acts of 1977,
to similar effect.
As to notices required by this subtitle, see, also,
Order No. 6 of the Joint Standing Committee on
Administrative, Executive and Legislative Review,
September 26, 1975, which requires publication in the
Maryland Register of these notices. (Vol. 2, Maryland
Register, page 1364.)
Since the independence of the Transportation
Professional Services Selection Board is critical to the
exercise of its functions, the Board has been excepted by
this revision from the provisions of §2-103(f) and (g) of
this article, relating to the Secretary's authority to
transfer functions and exercise the powers of units in
the Department. A similar change relating to the General
Board is made in Art. 4 1, §23lC(f).
Several questions as to the intent and scope of
certain provisions of this subtitle are noted in the
appropriate revisor's notes. The Commission also feels
that there are certain additional issues that deserve
legislative attention and study. These can be summarized
as follows:
(1) Should the term "architectural or
engineering services" be defined?
(2) To what extent does the Board have
jurisdiction over contracts that are under $25,000
originally, but that are increased by supplemental
agreements to an amount over that figure?
(3) If an original contract has been approved
under this subtitle, does a supplemental agreement to
that contract require Board review and recommendations?
What if the supplemental agreement itself costs over
$25,000?
(4) To what extent is the source of funds to
be considered? If funds for the project are provided by
the federal government, must the contract undergo the
board review process? Suppose the State grants State
money to a political subdivision that plans to use over
$25,000 of the money for architectural or engineering
services: must the contract undergo Board review?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
