The way forward for the Aspen-Pitkin County Airport appeared to develop into extra sure when the Federal Aviation Administration on Oct. 23 gave the county commissioners the preliminary go-ahead to renovate the airport and revamp its deteriorating runway, which airport officers say has been being “pieced collectively” since 1957.
However that go-ahead may very well be meaningless if a citizen-initiated poll measure to strip the Pitkin County commissioners of their energy to make choices in regards to the runway passes on Election Day.
The FAA’s green-lighting of the amended Airport Format Plan, or ALP, is simply the most recent step within the county’s efforts to modernize the airport because the company authorized a grasp redevelopment plan in 2012.
That course of has been riddled with controversy centered largely on whether or not or to not widen the space between the runway and taxiway, which might permit for bigger planes to land on the mountain airport that sits at 7,815 toes. The plan the FAA reviewed contains the separation, which the company says is critical for the county to obtain federal funding essential for the runway’s reconstruction.
The FAA made solely slight tweaks to the plan submitted in Could, Pitkin County Supervisor Jon Peacock wrote in a memo to the county commissioners Oct. 25. That paves the way in which for a studying of the amended ALP on the commissioners assembly Wednesday, the day after Election Day, and a public listening to Nov. 20. If all goes easily, and the board votes to signal the plan and ship it again to the FAA for ultimate approval, following an environmental evaluation re-evaluation, the airport overhaul ought to start as early as 2026 and take seven to 11 years to finish.
However the course of may come to a screeching halt if poll Query 200, which might strip the commissioners of their energy to make choices in regards to the runway, beats poll Query 1C, which might reaffirm the commissioners’ authority to approve and implement a runway format, together with different airport choices.
On the coronary heart of these votes is a struggle over whether or not to widen the space between the taxiway and runway. Opponents say doing so “solely advantages larger personal planes” and opens the door for undesirable development within the Roaring Fork Valley. Proponents say it can make touchdown and takeoff safer for extra airways desirous to fly out and in of the valley and usher in cleaner planes.
However in a letter dated Oct. 17, the FAA mentioned if Query 200 passes, it could be compelled to withhold federal funding for the airport as a result of the measure would “deprive” the county of “rights and powers” essential to carry out all or any phrases and situations stipulated within the settlement for airport funding.
FAA spokesperson Brittany Trotter mentioned the timing of the Oct. 17 letter “was not primarily based on the mailing of ballots or timing of the election.” Pitkin County commissioner Greg Poschman mentioned the FAA’s approval of the ALP on Oct. 23 “makes everybody suppose it was political,” despite the fact that “these are bureaucrats in D.C.” and “naturally, it being authorities, you realize the tempo of presidency progress, that’s how lengthy it took.”
All that’s left now could be Election Day and tallying the votes.
Matt Moseley, president of the Ignition Technique Group and a spokesperson for Our Airport Our Vote, mentioned if 1C passes and 200 doesn’t, “we tuck our tail, say individuals can disagree, and go ahead.”
Poschman mentioned if 1C passes and 200 doesn’t, “it reaffirms our authority, which we had earlier than the poll measures got here on, and nonetheless have, truly. Then we may go forward and signal it, understanding nearly all of our public are behind it.”
But when 1C fails and 200 passes, he mentioned, “I feel all of the commissioners will agree our job is to execute on the desire of nearly all of the individuals … and that’s going to require some deep pondering and a few dialog among the many board.”
The problem turns into extra sophisticated if each 1C and 200 go.
Mark Grueskin, an elections lawyer, mentioned in that case, the county could have authority to do what it needs, “except the runway enlargement or relocation, wherein case the commissioners can suggest no matter they need, however these proposed runway modifications shall be topic to voter approval.”
However the commissioners say a clause in Pitkin County’s residence rule constitution would give them decision-making authority. That clause says “however, any provision of the Dwelling Rule Constitution on the contrary, the Board of County Commissioners shall have the facility and authority to approve and implement a bodily format.”
Each events have talked about the opportunity of litigation.
If that occurs, Grueskin mentioned, “I wouldn’t wish to be the individual telling a court docket that fewer ‘sure’ votes prevail over a better variety of ‘sure’ votes between two competing measures.”
