Intranet

Procurement Tool Kit

Fairfield County Contracting Procedures Update 2025: competitive bidding limits, competitive selection, contract routing and contract review.

VideoFairfield County Contracting Procedures Update Slide DeckFairfield County Contracting Procedures Update
Slide Deck

Fairfield County Contracting Procedures Update 2025

APA Amy Brown Thompson APA Steven Darnell APA Austin Lines

Updates for contract routing

Use the Updated Contract Routing Form (Revised 12-31-2024). Please make sure that this is the version of the contract routing form that you are using!

Competitive bidding limit $75,000 $77,250

Ohio Rev. Code 9.17: Each calendar year the amount increases three percent from the previous year as determined and published by the director of commerce.

What does the creation of ORC 9.17 do?

  • Competitive Bidding Limits increase annually by 3%. This began January 1, 2025.
  • The new limits will be posted on the Ohio Department of Commerce website (same place where prevailing wage limits are posted).
  • Check out the effective dates listed on the bottom of the contract routing form.

When is competitive selection necessary? (R.C. 307.86)

Anything to be
  • Purchased
  • Leased
  • Leased with an option or agreement to purchase
  • Constructed

AND when the cost exceeds the limits prescribed in Ohio Rev. Code 9.17

What does this include?
  • Any product
  • Structure
  • Construction/reconstruction
  • Improvement
  • Maintenance
  • Repair
  • Service

Exceptions to competitive bidding

See Contract Routing Form.

“Professional Services” include the following:

AccountantArchitect*Attorney at lawPhysicianProfessional engineer*Construction project managerConsultantSurveyorAppraiser

*So long as the services are not design services related to a public improvement. Must do a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for those design services under R.C. 153.65–153.73.

“Emergency” (ORC 307.86(A))

Means unanimous vote of BCC and the estimated cost is less than $125K and there is actual physical disaster to structures, radio communications equipment, or computers.

  • If all of the above occurs, still need to do an informal quote process of obtaining at least 3 quotes.
  • Have to hold documentation regarding quotes for at least one year.

“Sole source” refers to ORC 307.86(B)(1) and (2)

  1. (B)(1) The purchase consists of supplies or a replacement or supplemental part or parts for a product or equipment owned or leased by the county, and the only source of supply for the supplies, part, or parts is limited to a single supplier.
  2. (B)(2) The purchase consists of services related to information technology, such as programming services, that are proprietary or limited to a single source.

If you are asserting a “sole source” exception, must include documentation to support that assertion. A written summary from the person routing the contract with a letter from the vendor should be sufficient.

Different types of competitive selection

ITB
Invitation to Bid
  • Solicitation for “lowest and best” bid
  • Winning bid must be both the lowest and most responsive to the ITB
  • More important to be responsive to the ITB and not necessarily the cheapest bid
  • Important to be fair to all prospective bidders during process
  • If a question is posed by one bidder, a response needs to be issued to all bidders
  • Any amendment to the solicitation must be shared with all
RFP
Request for Proposals
  • Solicitation for proposal that is later scored and negotiated
  • See R.C. 307.862
  • Can only be used for certain types of purchases/leases
  • Preferred for more technical or service-based purchases
RFQ
Request for Qualifications
  • Solicitation for qualifications of architects and engineers to design public improvements
  • Covered by R.C. 153.65–153.73
  • Only need to do for design build construction projects
  • Can pre-qualify architects and engineers if project is less than $50,000 but more than $25,000
  • If project is less than $25,000, no prequalification of architects or engineers for design projects is necessary (ORC 153.71)
  • If project is more than $50,000, specific RFQ must be issued
  • Can solicit qualifications more informally

Updates to contract review

2023
409
contracts reviewed and approved through CRMS
2024
461
contracts reviewed and approved through CRMS

This does not include contracts for other County boards whose contracts do not go through CRMS (i.e. Board of DD and ADAMH).

Issues the Prosecutor’s Office will look for in contract review

Fees & liability
  • Indemnification clauses
  • Collection/attorney fees
  • Interest

The Auditor must be able to appropriate the necessary funds per RC 5705.41(D)(1). Unless there is a maximum or definite amount, the funds could not be properly appropriated.

Venue & terms
  • Venue
  • Choice of law
  • Not included terms and conditions (link to a website)

The contract should be governed by laws of the state of Ohio and the venue in Fairfield County Courts.

The Prosecutor’s Office reviews the contracts for form only. We do not review them for fair terms, etc. The expectation that the department negotiating the contract has the expert knowledge to obtain the best terms.

R.C. 5705.41 (Holy grail for contract review)

The County may NOT make any contract involving the expenditure of money unless there is attached thereto a certificate of the Auditor that the amount required to meet the obligation or, in the case of a continuing contract to be performed in whole or in part in an ensuing fiscal year, the amount required to meet the obligation in the fiscal year in which the contract is made, has been lawfully appropriated for such purpose and is in the treasury or in process of collection to the credit of an appropriate fund free from any previous encumbrances.

This obligation is met by the purchase order
  • The requirement of R.C. 5705.41 means that the contract MUST have a definite maximum amount.
  • Auditor cannot certify unknown amount.
No open indemnification clauses!

An indemnification clause is a promise to cover losses or damage sustained—but if we do not know what those losses or damages are, how can we say we have the money to cover them?

HB 497 to the rescue!

Signed into law by Governor DeWine on January 8, 2025, aka “County Omnibus Bill.” Does many things, but the one thing we will discuss today is that HB 497 prohibits certain terms from being included in a county contract.

New ORC 307.901 (effective 04-09-25)

As used in this section, “county” includes any agency, department, authority, commission, office, or board of a county.

Except as otherwise required or permitted by state or federal law, a contract entered into by the contracting authority for the procurement of goods or services shall not include any of the following:

  1. A provision that requires the county to indemnify or hold harmless another person;
  2. A provision by which the county agrees to binding arbitration or any other binding extrajudicial dispute resolution process;
  3. A provision that names a venue for any action or dispute against the county other than a court of proper jurisdiction in the county;
  4. A provision that requires the county to agree to limit the liability for any direct loss to the county for bodily injury, death, or damage to property of the county caused by the negligence, intentional or willful misconduct, fraudulent act, recklessness, or other tortious conduct of a person or a person’s employees or agents, or a provision that otherwise imposes an indemnification obligation on the county;
  5. A provision that requires the county to be bound by a term or condition that is unknown to the county at the time of signing a contract, that is not specifically negotiated with the county, that may be unilaterally changed by the other party, or that is electronically accepted by a county employee;
  6. A provision that provides for a person other than the prosecuting attorney, or an attorney employed pursuant to section 305.14 or 309.09 of the Revised Code, to serve as legal counsel for the county;
  7. A provision that is inconsistent with the county’s obligations under section 149.43 of the Revised Code;
  8. A provision that limits the county’s ability to recover the cost for a replacement contractor.

New 307.901 (cont’d)

  • If a contract contains a term or condition described in division (B) of this section, the term or condition is void ab initio, and the contract containing that term or condition otherwise is enforceable as if it did not contain such term or condition.
  • A contract that contains a term or condition described in division (B) of this section shall be governed by and construed in accordance with Ohio law notwithstanding any term or condition to the contrary in the contract.
  • This section does not apply to a contract in effect before the effective date of this section.

Does ORC 307.901 affect all of the terms that FCPO reviews for?

The short answer is “no.”

Terms not impacted by ORC 307.901
  • Interest rate on delinquent balances
  • Liquidated damages
  • Damages for violating a non-solicitation clause
  • Injunctive relief
  • Miscellaneous costs for other services (i.e. litigation holds)

These terms still need to be redlined and removed (even after ORC 307.901 goes into effect).

How will this change contract review as we know it?

  • As of today (1/29/25), it is still business as usual as HB 497 will not go into effect until 4/9/25.
  • However, after 4/9/25, contract review should be easier.
  • FCPO considering developing a letter for CRMS to be shared with all vendors that sets forth ORC 307.901 and the fact that if those terms are included.
  • Will continue to monitor and see if any guidance is issued from CCAO on how best to utilize ORC 307.901.
Implementation of ORC 307.901

Regardless, you as the fiscal point of contact for Fairfield County contracts are the best line of defense when it comes to contract review.