Garfield County commissioners heard Sept. 9 from county public health officials about capital costs to update the county’s Environmental Health air‑quality monitoring equipment and instructed staff to wind down county‑funded monitoring sites and align the program around state monitoring in 2026. Public Health Director Joshua (last name not specified in transcript) and Environmental Health staffer Jeanette presented equipment age, replacement scenarios and budget options.

County officials said upgrade estimates range by scenario: a full equipment replacement and data‑communications upgrade presented at about $125,000; a smaller replacement limited to the Battle of Mesa site and a flow standard near $102,000; and a package including the Mesa flow standard plus a Carbondale ozone monitor at roughly $111,000. Joshua said those figures represent one‑time capital costs and are distinct from ongoing operational and maintenance expenses.

The presentation matters because much of the county’s monitoring network dates to the mid‑2000s and several monitors are past typical replacement lifespans in the 5–10 year range, staff said. Joshua told commissioners the county has reduced the number of county‑funded sites over the last decade and that the dominant, recurring air‑quality threat now is wildfire smoke rather than the oil‑and‑gas activity that drove earlier siting decisions. He said the only site still collecting volatile organic compound (VOC) samples as county‑funded monitoring is the Battle of Mesa site and noted some monitors are co‑funded or maintained by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE).

Brad (staff, finance) told the board Garfield County Public Health’s fund balance was about $4.2 million now and projected near $2.4 million in fiscal 2026. Jeanette gave detail on current contract spending: county ARS contractor costs for air‑monitoring technical support are about $49,259 for the second half of 2025 (ARS contract for ARS technical support), and the county contracts about $18,000 a year for VOC canister sampling. Joshua and Jeanette said the county’s ARS technical contract has been sole‑sourced and that ARS is the current installer and maintenance contractor for the instrumentation.

Commissioners and staff discussed options: (1) replace equipment now to extend useful life and reduce emergency repair/contractor calls, (2) continue piecemeal reactive replacements as devices fail, or (3) further narrow county‑funded effort to a minimal set of sites. Several commissioners raised budget pressure and questioned whether county funding for capital and operating costs remains justifiable while the state maintains some monitoring sites. Staff recommended preserving state‑funded sites and focusing county resources where local need is clear.

Joshua described sensors operated by private groups and businesses (for example, PurpleAir sensors and individual monitors sited by Alpine Bank and other organizations) as useful background information for residents but not replacements for regulatory, federally recognized monitors that feed AirNow and are used for official advisories. He also said state‑funded monitors remain important for response during major smoke events; the county’s monitors have been used in past incidents by federal and state responders.

Following discussion, commissioners directed staff to plan to shutter the county‑funded portion of the monitoring program as part of the 2026 budget process and to keep the county’s ARS contract in place through the end of 2025 to maintain existing sampling and support while the transition is planned. Staff said the state grant would continue supporting state sites and that the county would coordinate with CDPHE on the transition. No formal motion or vote was recorded at the work session; the direction was given verbally and will be implemented through the 2026 budget and subsequent staff actions.

Ending note: staff said they will return to the board during budget deliberations with specifics on which county‑funded sites would be closed, disposition of replaced equipment, and any options for cost‑sharing or industry‑supported monitoring if future activity or funding warrants expansion.