Commissioners question a $78,000 contractor bill after county crews provided traffic control

Commissioners debated whether to accept a contractor's $78,000 bill for a dust-control or roadwork job after county personnel said the county's crews provided traffic control and additional equipment that the contractor may not have included in the bid. One commissioner summarized the concern: the bid assumed the contractor would supply all equipment, but county machinery and staff were used, so the county should press for an itemized accounting or credit.

Board members emphasized protecting taxpayer dollars. "I'm elected to protect the taxpayers of Treasure County's dollars," one commissioner said while questioning whether the invoice included rental costs the contractor should have borne. Commissioners discussed pulling any unprocessed claim while staff reaches out to the contractor for an itemized invoice, checks what was actually performed, and compares rental/crew days against the contractor's original bid.

No vote to pay was taken at the meeting; staff were directed to follow up with detailed itemization from the contractor and to review whether a partial payment or negotiated reduction is appropriate. The discussion also covered documenting county labor and equipment use so the commissioners can evaluate a fair settlement.