HB 152 revises Georgia’s contracting rules for the acquisition of certain professional services by counties, municipalities, and state agencies. The bill updates provisions governing road-system and public-works contracting to clarify when local governments may negotiate contracts, retain the existing two-estimate requirement for many nonprofessional contracts between $20,000 and $200,000, and exempt specified professional services from that estimate requirement. It specifically directs counties and municipalities to use a qualifications-based selection process for architects, interior designers, land surveyors, landscape architects, and professional engineers, rather than selecting those services through price-based bidding.
The bill also adds a new Code section establishing a uniform process for local governments to procure professional services based on demonstrated competence, qualifications, and fair and reasonable fees. It authorizes local governments to consider a broad range of qualifications, to negotiate with a sole responsive proposer, to enter into on-demand multiparty professional services contracts, and to expand the scope of an existing professional relationship when appropriate. In addition, it amends the state’s professional-services law to expressly include local governments in the definitions and policy framework, and it authorizes local governments to adopt ordinances or regulations to implement the chapter. The act takes effect July 1, 2026.
The bill’s impact is to standardize and broaden Georgia’s rules for how public entities procure design and engineering-related services, shifting those procurements further toward qualifications-based selection rather than low-bid competition. It affects counties, municipalities, consolidated governments, and state agencies, and it updates multiple code sections in Titles 32, 36, and 50. Local governments would gain clearer authority to manage professional-services procurement, while architects, engineers, surveyors, landscape architects, and interior designers would be subject to a more formalized selection process.
No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no documented debate or recorded sentiment in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears policy-driven and administrative rather than controversial on its face, with an emphasis on procurement efficiency, professional qualification standards, and continuity of service. Any contention would likely center on the balance between local discretion and competitive bidding, and on whether the expanded exemptions and negotiation authority reduce price competition or improve project quality and administrative flexibility.
HB 152 amends Georgia law governing county and municipal contracting and public-works procurement, and it expands the state’s professional-services procurement framework to local governments. It changes Code Sections 32-4-63 and 32-4-113 to exempt specified professional services from the two-estimate rule, adds a new local-government procurement process in Chapter 91 of Title 36, and revises Chapter 22 of Title 50 to define local governments, professional services, and project thresholds. The bill would affect counties, municipalities, consolidated governments, and the listed professional disciplines by requiring qualifications-based selection and authorizing local implementation rules.
No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the record supplied. The bill’s text suggests a generally technical, administrative approach focused on procurement modernization and consistency across state and local government. Its structure indicates an intent to improve how governments hire professional service providers rather than to make a broader policy change.
The main likely point of contention is the bill’s move away from price-based competition for certain professional services and toward qualifications-based selection, which some may view as reducing transparency or cost competition while others may see it as improving project quality. Another possible issue is the expanded discretion given to local governments to evaluate qualifications, negotiate with sole responders, maintain continuing contracts, and extend existing professional relationships. Those provisions could be viewed as increasing flexibility, but also as creating room for favoritism or reduced competitive pressure.