AI-assisted research summary: People aggrieved by a contract award must use the procedures, remedies, and policy board rules in this part as the exclusive way to resolve their concerns.
The procedures and remedies provided for in this part, and the rules adopted by the policy board, shall be the exclusive means available for persons aggrieved in connection with the award of a contract to resolve their concerns. [L 1997, c 190, pt of §2] Case Notes As nothing in this chapter expressly precluded judicial review, it did not violate the separation of powers doctrine; judicial review was available in connection with chapter 103F by way of a declaratory action under §632-1. 127 H. 76, 276 P.3d 645 (2012). Under the circumstances of the case, the decisions of the administrative officers of the department of education to reject the proposal of petitioner that responded to a request for proposals to provide health and human services under contracts pursuant to this chapter were subject to judicial review; §§103F-501 and 103F-502(c) and this section do not prohibit judicial review. 127 H. 263, 277 P.3d 988 (2012). Although §632-1 generally endorses declaratory relief in civil cases, it disallows such relief where a statute provides a special form of remedy for a specific type of case; where this chapter provided for a protest process under §103F-501 through this section, and this section limited the protestor to an administrative process as the "exclusive means" to resolve contract disputes, declaratory relief under §632-1 was unavailable because §632-1 specifically mandates that the statutory remedy provided in this chapter must be followed. 125 H. 200 (App.), 257 P.3d 213.