PUBLIC WORKS: Creates the Task Force on Construction Management at Risk (CMaR).
SCR 64 creates the Task Force on Construction Management at Risk (CMaR) to study Louisiana’s CMaR public works delivery method and recommend any needed legislative or policy changes. The resolution recites the history of CMaR in Louisiana, including its creation in 2014, later pilot-program expansions, lowered project thresholds, and the addition of certain public entities such as hospital districts. It also notes that CMaR is intended to let public owners contract separately with a designer and a contractor during preconstruction, with the contractor later assuming construction responsibility under a guaranteed maximum price arrangement.
The task force is directed to examine the viability, necessity, effects, and restrictions of CMaR for public entities and state agencies, taking into account past and current law, policy, and industry practice. It must produce a written report with recommendations and specific legislative proposals to the Legislature and the David R. Poynter Legislative Research Library by March 1, 2028. The resolution also sets out the task force’s membership, meeting deadlines, quorum rules, and termination date.
This resolution does not directly amend substantive law, but it establishes a temporary legislative task force to review R.S. 38:2225.2.4 and the broader statutory framework governing construction management at risk for public works. Its practical impact is to create a formal process for evaluating whether current thresholds, approvals, and eligibility rules for public entities should be retained, revised, expanded, or restricted, with the possibility of future legislation based on the task force’s findings. The affected parties include state agencies, local public entities, hospital districts, transportation and public works committees, and the construction industry.
The overall sentiment reflected in the resolution is cautious and evaluative rather than oppositional. The bill’s findings acknowledge that CMaR has been used and expanded over time, but also indicate a need to assess its viability, necessity, and effects. The absence of recorded opposition, amendments, or committee debate in the provided history suggests the measure was treated as a study resolution and moved forward without notable controversy.
The main point of potential contention is the scope and use of CMaR for public projects, especially the lowered project-cost thresholds and the requirement in some cases for prior committee notification and approval. Supporters of the study appear to want a comprehensive review of whether CMaR appropriately shifts financial and scheduling risk to contractors and whether the current rules are working for public owners. Any opposition would likely come from stakeholders with differing views on procurement flexibility, oversight, project cost controls, and whether CMaR should remain limited or be expanded further, but no specific objections are reflected in the provided record.