Laserfiche WebLink
13. %~EREAS, the Board now deems it appropriate to invoke in <br />writing the exemption authorized by Section 143-64.32(b} of the <br />General Statutes by stating and clarifying the reasons therefor <br /> <br />and the circumstances attendant thereto: <br /> NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: <br /> <br /> 1. The circumstances attendant to the employment of the <br />firm of Talbert, Cox & Associates, Inc. (now Espey ~uston <br />Company) immediately consecutive to work performed by Wilbur <br />Smith and Associates in relation to airport studies, without <br />again announcing requirements to select firms qualified to <br />provide such services, are those stated in clauses one through <br />ten above. <br /> <br /> 2.. The reasons for employing Ta!bert, Cox & Associates, <br />Inc. (now Espey Huston Company) without again announcing <br />requirements to select firms are: <br /> <br /> a. Talbert, Cox & Associates {now Espey Huston <br /> Company) was among the five firms that responded to the <br /> invitation to submit proposals authorized upon motion <br /> by the Board on June 17, 1985, and the firm's interest <br /> and qualifications were well known to the County. <br /> <br /> b. The work immediately required involved <br /> resolving difficulties experienced with the work <br /> performed by Wilbur Smith and Associates, and the 1979 <br /> County experience with an earlier airport study <br /> conducted by Talbert,' Cox & Associates, Inc. (now Espey <br /> Huston Company; indicated that the firm was uniquely <br /> <br /> <br />