Legislator objects to Hunt Engineers amendment but board approves contract amendment 12-3

During consideration of Amendment No. 3 to the county's agreement with Hunt Engineers, an individual legislator voiced a strong objection, saying he would vote no because of prior unsatisfactory performance on a downtown building project.

The objection was explicit: the legislator stated he would "be a no vote on this" and said he was "totally disgusted" with Hunt's work on a past county building, remarks that framed the dissent. The board proceeded to a roll-call vote; recorded votes produced 12 ayes and 3 no's and the amendment was approved.

The exchange was limited to one legislator's public criticism and the formal roll-call tally. No further explanation from county staff about Hunt's contracting history or corrective actions was recorded on the transcript.