Opinion ID: 2609783
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Whether NRS 281.481(3) excludes architects as persons specifically prohibited by law from bidding on state contracts.

Text: A second argument asserted by JMAL which found support in the court below is that NRS 281.481(3) cannot be applied to architects because architects are specifically prohibited from bidding on government contracts. NRS 281.481(3) states that it applies to any public officer or employee [u]nless [they are] specifically prohibited by law... from making a bid on a government contract. NRS 332.115 states that government contracts for professional services are by their nature ... not adapted to award by competitive bidding. Therefore, JMAL argue that they are exempted from NRS 281.481(3) because architects are specifically prohibited by law from bidding on public projects. JMAL seeks further support from NRS 625.530(3) and NAC 623.800. As previously noted, NRS 625.530(3) provides that the selection of an architect for a public project must be made on the basis of the competence and qualifications of the ... architect for the type of services to be performed, and not on the basis of competitive fees. Once the architect is selected, the architect and the agency must come to an agreement upon a fair and reasonable fee. Id. NAC 623.800 contains a similar provision; it prevents an architect from submitting information which would enable the public agency to evaluate the proposal on any basis other than the competence and qualifications of the registrant. These provisions, argue JMAL, show that architects may not bid on government projects and that therefore the bidding requirements of NRS 281.481(3) are inapplicable to them. BMSH argues in rebuttal that these provisions only prevent architects from competing for government projects based on price or fees and not on the best design. Since price was never a factor considered in the design competition, BMSH contends that neither provision was violated. BMSH also points to a recent amendment to NRS 281.481 which was passed on July 1, 1993. It reads, in relevant part, as follows: A full- or part-time faculty member in the University of Nevada System may bid on or enter into a contract with a governmental agency if he [or she] has not taken part in developing the contract plans and specifications and he [or she] will not be personally involved in opening, considering or accepting offers. 1993 Nev.Stat., ch. 536, § 1(3) at 2241 (emphasis added). BMSH does not argue that this amendment ought to be retroactively applied. Rather, they argue that the amendment evinces a legislative intent to counter the semantic acrobatics which JMAL urged upon the district court. We are persuaded that NRS 625.530 and NAC 623.800 are intended to prevent public agencies from awarding contracts for architectural services to the lowest bidder. Where a public facility is involved, public safety requires that factors such as expertise and experience take precedence over cost. [1] While architects may compete for government projects, they may not do so on the basis of price. Therefore, JMAL would not be specifically prohibited by law so as to escape the purview of NRS 281.481(3), unless they submitted bids based on price. Finally, it is worth noting that the Commission considered these very arguments at length and concluded that [t]hese statutory and regulatory provisions enjoin architects in Nevada from being awarded a contract with the state based on a lowest price competitive bid. It does not prevent the state from selecting an architect based on other competitive criteria. We conclude that NRS 281.481(3) does not exclude architects as persons specifically prohibited by law from bidding on state contracts unless the submitted bids were based on price.