HOUSE BILL REPORT

ESHB 1394

BYHouse Committee on Agriculture & Rural Development (originally sponsored by Representatives Rayburn and Baugher)

Revising irrigation district bidding requirements.

House Committe on Agriculture & Rural Development

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass as amended.  (12)

      Signed by Representatives Rayburn, Chair; Kremen, Vice Chair; Nealey, Ranking Republican Member; Baugher, Chandler, Doty, Grant, Jesernig, Kirby,  McLean, Rasmussen and Youngsman.

House Staff:Kenneth Hirst (786-7105)

AS PASSED HOUSE FEBRUARY 13, 1990

BACKGROUND:

With certain exceptions, if the board of directors of an irrigation district decides to purchase work or materials by contract, it must use a publicly conducted, sealed bidding procedure.

A sewer or water district may let a contract for a project using a small works roster if the cost of the project is less than $25,000.  An exception to the bidding requirements established for such districts is provided for purchases limited to a single source of supply and purchases involving special facilities, services, or market conditions which may be best secured by direct negotiation.  The requirements for public bids are also waived in certain emergencies.

SUMMARY:

The board of an irrigation district may use telephone or written bidding by persons on a small works roster to let a contract for a project costing less than $100,000.  The roster is composed of all responsible contractors who have requested to be on the list.  It must be revised annually.  Immediately after an award is made, the bid quotations must be recorded, open to public inspection, and available by telephone inquiry.

The provisions of irrigation district law requiring public bidding on contracts do not apply: in certain emergencies; or to purchases which are clearly and legitimately limited to a single source of supply or to purchases involving special facilities, services, or market conditions, in which instances the purchase price may be best set by direct negotiation.

Fiscal Note:      Not Requested.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    (Original Bill in 1989) James Trull, State Water Resources Association; and Chan Bailey, Columbia Basin Irrigation Districts.  (Substitute Bill in 1990) Paul Chasco, State Water Resources Association.

House Committee - Testified Against:      (Original Bill in 1989) Dick Ducharme, Utility Contractors' Association; and Duke Schaub, Associated General Contractors.  (Substitute Bill in 1990) No one.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (Original Bill in 1989) (1) Cities, ports, and water districts may use small works rosters; this bill allows irrigation districts to do so.  It will permit the districts to respond to emergency situations quickly.  (2) The period during which districts may repair the lining of the extensive canal system in the Columbia Basin Project is both short and unpredictable. The bill will permit the irrigation districts in the project to let contracts quickly for replacing the cement tiles in the system.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (Original Bill in 1989) (1) Other entities are not permitted to prequalify contractors; irrigation districts should not be permitted to do so either.  (2) "Prequalification" permits favoritism.  The only prequalifications that are needed are a performance bond and the terms of a contract.