Construction manager at-risk program; exempt under public bidding laws.
SB 2848 amends Mississippi’s public construction and purchasing laws to expand the use of the construction manager at-risk (CMAR) delivery method by the Department of Finance and Administration (DFA). Under the bill, once DFA hires a construction manager for a project, it may require that manager to procure the downstream construction contracts needed to complete the work. Those contracts would be between the construction manager and the subcontractors/contractors, and they would be exempt from the state bid law. The bill also makes conforming changes to the state’s general procurement statute to expressly recognize CMAR contracts as exempt from competitive bidding requirements.
The measure is primarily a procurement and project-delivery bill. It preserves the existing framework for competitive bidding in Mississippi, but adds CMAR contracts to the list of exempted procurement categories and clarifies how those projects are to be handled. The bill takes effect July 1, 2025, and would apply to state construction projects managed through DFA, with the Mississippi State Port Authority expressly excluded from the section being amended.
The bill’s impact on state law is to give DFA more flexibility and control over CMAR projects while reducing the role of traditional public bidding for the construction contracts that flow from those projects. It also aligns Section 31-7-13 with the new CMAR language by adding a specific exemption for construction manager at-risk contracts. In practical terms, this shifts more contracting authority to the construction manager and away from direct state-to-trade-contractor bidding, while leaving the initial selection of the construction manager subject to the CMAR procurement rules in Section 31-7-13.2.
The general sentiment reflected by the bill’s framing is favorable toward efficiency, transparency, and administrative flexibility in public construction procurement. The caption and committee assignment suggest the bill is presented as a government accountability and efficiency measure rather than a major policy overhaul. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, amendments, or opposition in the available materials.
The main point of contention likely concerns the exemption from the bid law. Supporters would view the change as a way to streamline project delivery and allow DFA to manage complex construction more effectively, while critics may worry that exempting resulting construction contracts from competitive bidding reduces price competition, transparency, and oversight. The bill does not resolve those concerns directly; instead, it codifies the exemption and leaves procurement of the CMAR itself under the separate CMAR selection process.
SB 2848 amends Sections 31-11-3 and 31-7-13 of the Mississippi Code to authorize DFA, when using the construction manager at-risk method, to require the construction manager to procure all resulting construction contracts needed to complete a project, and to exempt those contracts from the state bid law. It also adds a conforming exemption in the general public purchasing statute so CMAR contracts are specifically listed among procurement categories not subject to ordinary competitive bidding rules. The bill affects DFA, construction managers, contractors, subcontractors, and state construction projects using CMAR delivery.
The available record suggests the bill is generally framed positively, with an emphasis on accountability, efficiency, and transparency in state construction procurement. Because there are no committee transcripts or votes included, there is no documented floor or committee opposition in the materials provided. The overall posture of the bill appears supportive of giving DFA more flexibility in managing complex construction projects.
The likely controversy is the bill’s carve-out from the bid law. Supporters would argue that CMAR projects need flexibility and centralized procurement to keep projects moving and manage risk, while opponents may argue that exempting downstream construction contracts from competitive bidding could reduce competition, increase costs, or weaken public oversight. The bill specifically shifts contracting authority to the construction manager after DFA selects that manager, which is the key policy tradeoff embedded in the measure.