Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hooper council retains Richards law firm as city attorneys, waives RFP requirement
Summary
The Hooper City Council voted on March 6 to retain Reed and Brandon Richards as the city—s attorneys and to forego issuing a request for proposals for legal services. Council instructed staff to draft a contract and said the agreement would be provided to the Utah State Auditor.
The Hooper City Council voted March 6 to retain Reed and Brandon Richards as Hooper City attorneys and not to issue an RFP for legal services.
Council discussion began in the work meeting and continued into the regular session. Members said they had decided informally that they preferred to continue working with Reed and Brandon Richards rather than launch a formal procurement process. The council directed staff to draft a written contract setting out the scope of services and fee structure, to be reviewed and approved by the council, and to make the contract available to the Utah State Auditor.
Why it matters: The vote formalizes who will serve as the city—s legal counsel and ends a short-lived plan to post an RFP. Council members said the intention is to avoid interrupting legal services while the city finalizes a written agreement.
During the work-meeting discussion, Reed (last name referenced in the meeting) described a possible arrangement in which the attorney team would not be required to attend every meeting but would make themselves available at designated times to meet with staff and council members. Reed also suggested a weekly time for legal consultation with city staff to handle land-use and ordinance questions efficiently.
Council members also discussed whether an RFP was legally required for this service and concluded it was not necessary in this circumstance. Council Member Wilcox made the motion to retain Reed and Brandon Richards and to forgo interim RFPs; Council Member Flowers seconded the motion. The council voted in favor and the motion carried.
The council asked staff to prepare a contract similar to other retained-service agreements used by neighboring entities and to include flexibility to end the contract should the parties decide to do so in the future. Council members said the contract will specify the scope of legal services, fee arrangements and reporting procedures and will be made available to the state auditor as required.
Ending: The council—s action preserves continuity of legal services while staff prepares a formal contract for council review.
