Chapter 279

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      Political subdivisions subject to provisions of this [former] chapter are not required to comply with it before entering into contracts for supplies or services of public utilities whose rates are regulated by Motor Carriers Law, [former] ORS chapter 767. Bower Trucking and Whse. Co. v. Multnomah Cty., 35 Or App 427, 582 P2d 439 (1978)

 

      Where state agency’s objective in contracting for production of documentary films on construction of highway bridge was to obtain films for its own use, contract was not within statutory exceptions and was subject to competitive bidding procedures of this [former] chapter. Photo-Art Commercial Studios v. Hunter, 42 Or App 207, 600 P2d 471 (1979)

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Validity of 10-hour day, 40-hour week without overtime in public employment, (1972) Vol 35, p 1083; application of bidding requirements to sale of residence constructed by vocational education department, (1977) Vol 38, p 1090; incorporation of energy efficiency standards of Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 into state and local government purchasing specifications, (1978) Vol 39, p 35

 

279.005 to 279.111

 

      NOTE: Subject sections all subsequently repealed; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      Local housing authorities qualify as public agencies subject to contracting and bonding requirements. Platt Electric Supply, Inc. v. Van Horn, 160 Or App 248, 982 P2d 1 (1999)

 

279.011 to 279.055

 

      NOTE: Subject sections all subsequently repealed; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Uniform contract procedure for agencies, (1976) Vol 37, p 1534; authority of Military Department to contract for food concessions for armories, (1977) Vol 38, p 1010

 

279.011

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      “Agency of the State of Oregon” does not include Legislative Administration Committee. Enertrol Power Monitoring Corp. v. State of Oregon, 314 Or 78, 836 P2d 123 (1992)

 

      “Public contract” does not include contracts between general contractor and subcontractors. Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc. v. Tri-Met, 170 Or App 271, 12 P3d 62 (2000)

 

      “Major renovation” to real property requires restoring property to former state. State ex rel Oregon Waste Systems, Inc. v. United Pacific Insurance Co., 172 Or App 435, 18 P3d 491 (2001), Sup Ct review denied

 

279.015

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      This section does not require separate rule-making proceeding before individual contract or product is exempted from bidding process. Morse Bros. v. City of Lake Oswego, 55 Or App 886, 640 P2d 645 (1982), Sup Ct review denied

 

      In evaluating whether exemption will result in favoritism in awarding of public contracts or will diminish competition for public contracts, reviewer is not required to consider effect of exemption on awarding of, or competition for, subcontracts. Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc. v. Tri-Met, 170 Or App 271, 12 P3d 62 (2000)

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Entry by public contracting agency into contract with low bidder under arrangement to hold bid open at bid price plus increment based on cost of living index, (1981) Vol 41, p 327

 

279.017

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      This section does not require separate rule-making proceeding before individual contract or product is exempted from bidding process. Morse Bros. v. City of Lake Oswego, 55 Or App 886, 640 P2d 645 (1982), Sup Ct review denied

 

279.019

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.350.

 

279.025

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Amendment or cancellation of public contracts, (1974) Vol 36, p 1127

 

279.027

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      Delivery of bid substantially complies with statutory requirements if bid is received in timely manner by designated public official and can be accurately identified, secured and opened at time and place designated for public opening. JAL Construction, Inc. v. Friedman, 191 Or App 492, 83 P3d 332 (2004), Sup Ct review denied

 

279.029

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.375.

 

279.031

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.385.

 

279.045

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.450.

 

279.051

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279A.055.

 

279.067

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      This section did not provide jurisdiction to review State Highway Division order, because it does not apply to state agencies. Clarke Electric, Inc. v. State Highway Division, 93 Or App 693, 763 P2d 1199 (1988)

 

      Party who was not of type listed as eligible to bring or defend action and who was not necessary party could recover attorney fees as successful party. Steelman-Duff, Inc. v. Dept. of Transportation, 323 Or 220, 915 P2d 958 (1996)

 

      In determining reasonable attorney fees, court must describe effect of each factor relied upon. Northwest Pump and Equipment Co. v. Stach, 167 Or App 64, 1 P3d 466 (2000)

 

      Suit under this section is not exclusive mechanism for aggrieved bidder to obtain judicial review of purported public contracting law violation. Dental v. City of Salem, 196 Or App 574, 103 P3d 1150 (2004)

 

279.324 to 279.332

 

      NOTE: Subject sections all subsequently repealed; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Amendment or cancellation of public contracts, (1974) Vol 36, p 1127

 

279.334

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      Even where costs could be computed on bids submitted on project, nonunion contractor had standing to challenge overtime payment exemption granted contractors operating under collective bargaining agreement on equal protection grounds. Babler Bros., Inc. v. Roberts, 761 F Supp 97 (D. Or. 1991), aff’d 995 F2d 911 (1993)

 

      This provision is rationally related to protection of nonunion workers who lack opportunity to negotiate overtime pay. Babler Bros., Inc. v. Roberts, 761 F Supp 97 (D. Or. 1991), aff’d995 F2d 911 (1993)

 

      Federal Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act does not preempt this section and requirement of this section that nonunion contractor pay overtime to employees for hours worked in excess of standard eight-hour workday applied in addition to requirements of federal Act. Dyad Construction, Inc. v. City of Portland, 765 F Supp 653 (1991); aff’d in consolidated case Babler Bros., Inc. v. Roberts, 995 F2d 911 (1993)

 

      Statute requiring nonunion employers, but not union employers, on public project to pay overtime for all hours worked in excess of eight hours per day, is not preempted by National Labor Relations Act. Babler Bros., Inc. v. Roberts, 995 F2d 911 (1993)

 

279.338

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Nonapplicability to direct employes of state, changing regular eight-hour day and 40-hour week without overtime pay, penalty, (1972) Vol 35, p 1291

 

279.340

 

      See annotations under ORS 653.268.

 

279.342

 

      See annotations under ORS 653.269.

 

279.348 to 279.356

 

      NOTE: Subject sections all subsequently repealed; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Workmen’s right to the “prevailing rate of wages” for work performed for a city by a county, (1972) Vol 36, p 274; janitorial or custodial work not subject, (1976) Vol 38, p 144

 

279.348

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.800.

 

279.350

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.840.

 

279.355

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.850.

 

279.356

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.855.

 

279.361

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.860.

 

279.365

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.870.

 

279.400

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.555.

 

279.435

(formerly 279.575)

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.570.

 

279.445

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.580.

 

279.526

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.600.

 

279.528

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.605.

 

279.542

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279C.625.

 

279.575

 

      See annotations under ORS 279.435.

 

279.711

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Insurance and title of federally funded vehicles, (1976) Vol 37, p 1021

 

279.712

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279A.140.

 

279.729

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Contracts for supply of recycled paper, (1980) Vol 40, p 267

 

279.748

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279A.030.

 

279.820

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279A.260.

 

279.828

(formerly 283.230)

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

      See annotations under ORS 279A.280.

 

279.835

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      Requirement that individuals with disabilities be employed for not less than 75 percent of work hours applies to entity workforce generally, not to work connected with specific service or product that is subject of bidding. Independent Contractors Research Institute v. Department of Administrative Services, 207 Or App 78, 139 P3d 995 (2006), Sup Ct review denied

 

279.845

 

NOTES OF DECISIONS

 

      Department of Administrative Services may use contested case proceeding process to determine prices for products or services offered by qualified nonprofit agency. BWK, Inc. v. Department of Administrative Services, 231 Or App 214, 218 P3d 156 (2009), Sup Ct review denied

 

      Department of Administrative Services “determines” price for product or service when department accepts price that is proposed by qualified nonprofit agency. BWK, Inc. v. Department of Administrative Services, 231 Or App 214, 218 P3d 156 (2009), Sup Ct review denied

 

279.990

 

      NOTE: Repealed as of March 1, 2005; but see sec. 334 and 336, c. 794, Oregon Laws 2003

 

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Penalty for violating [former] ORS 279.338, (1972) Vol 35, p 1291