Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Noxious Weeds topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Garfield County accepts single roadside spraying bid, adopts landowner opt-out agreement

Garfield County Board of Commissioners · April 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The county accepted the weed board's lone bid for roadside spraying and implemented a landowner agreement allowing property owners to opt out of county spraying if they personally treat the right-of-way; motion carried unanimously.

The Garfield County Board of Commissioners on March 4 accepted the Weed Board's recommendation to approve the sole bid received for the county's roadside noxious-weed spraying contract and implemented a landowner roadside-spraying opt-out agreement. Teo (listed in agenda as Teo Sink/Sinks), who presented the bid results and the agreement form, told the board the Weed Board voted to accept the lone bid. Vice-Chair Carla McWilliams moved to implement the landowner agreement form, and Commissioner Jerry Collins seconded; the motion carried with unanimous consent.

Supporting bid materials presented to the board list a contract period of July 1, 2026, through September 30, 2026, a budget allocation of $10,000 for state highway roads and $35,000 for county roads, and a contract bid rate of $125.00 per hour per spray unit. The bid packet identified available equipment (two F350 spray trucks and one ATV sprayer) and required that the bid cost include labor, fuel, travel and equipment maintenance.

The landowner agreement requires property owners who opt out to complete spraying of the described county right-of-way section by Aug. 1 and to provide proof of completion to the Garfield County Weed Coordinator for verification. The agreement notes failure to comply may result in penalties under county weed-control policy. The board did not modify the budget figures during the meeting and recorded no dissent on the motions.