Building Materials Corp. of America v. Board of Education
53 A.3d 347
Md.2012Background
- Baltimore County Board of Education uses an intergovernmental purchasing cooperative (PAEJPC/AEPA) to obtain roofing services; GAF alleges this violates ED § 5-112 and related regulations; BPW and IAC oversee school construction and have endorsed such cooperatives; the Board sought and obtained IAC/BPW approval for roofing contracts funded by State funds; the circuit court granted summary judgment for the Board and the Court affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ED § 5-112 bars coop roofing purchases | GAF says roofing not a 'good'/'commodity' and execution via coop violates §5-112(a)(3) | GAF’s reading wrong; Board relies on BPW/IAC regulations allowing coop use | Not barred; BPW/IAC regulations authorize |
| Whether roofing services fall under 'goods and commodities' | Roofing is not a 'good' or 'commodity' | Roof repair may constitute a 'requirement' under coop contracts | Can fall within 'goods/commodities' via regulation meaning |
| Whether BPW/IAC regulations authorize intergovernmental cooperative purchasing | Regulations do not extend to roof repair | Regulations authorize purchase of 'requirements' via coop and pooling/piggybacking | Yes, regulations permit |
| Whether BPW/IAC authority can override local procurement decisions | Authority limited to construction phase; local boards retain control | Regulations bind local boards and set procurement framework | Regulations have force of law and BPW/IAC authority prevails |
Key Cases Cited
- Demory Bros., Inc. v. Board of Public Works, 273 Md. 320 (1974) (context for viewing §5-112 in light of school construction statutes and BPW/IAC interpretation)
- Chesapeake Charter, Inc. v. Anne Arundel County Board of Education, 358 Md. 129 (2000) (BPW/IAC regulations prevail when in conflict with local authority in school construction)
- Davis v. State, 426 Md. 211 (2012) (illustrates deference to agency interpretations of regulations)
- Jerri’s Ceramic Arts, Inc. v. Consumer Prod. Safety Comm’n, 874 F.2d 205 (4th Cir. 1989) (distinction between legislative vs interpretive regulations)
- Secretary, Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services v. Demby, 390 Md. 580 (2006) (regulations with force of law; treatment of substantive rules)