Article posted Aspen Times October 23, 2024
Pitkin County Manager Jon Peacock received an Oct. 17 email from Denver Airports District Office Manager John P. Bauer over ballot question 200, the citizens initiative.
Deputy County Manager Rich Englehart, Airport Director Dan Bartholomew, and Colorado Division of Aeronautics Director Dave Ulane were also copied in the email.
The letter begins by stating that the “Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) would like to take the opportunity to express our concern regarding the proposed Pitkin County Ballot Question 200.”
This ballot question seeks to amend the Home Rule Charter to restrict county officials’ decision-making power regarding the expansion or relocation of any runway at the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport beyond the dimensions and locations that existed on Jan. 1 without voter approval in their ballot question. It also clearly defines “runway.”
The letter went on to say that Pitkin County, which is the sponsor of the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport, “is obligated to comply with FAA Grant Assurances as recipients” of almost $120 million in FAA grant funding since 1982.
Grant Assurance No. 5 states that Pitkin County “will not take or permit any action which would deprive it of any of the rights and powers necessary to perform any or all of the terms, conditions, and assurances in their grant agreement.”
This assurance goes on to say that the county “will act promptly to acquire, extinguish or modify any outstanding rights or claims of right of others which would interfere with such performance by the sponsor.”
The FAA reiterated that failure to comply with this assurance may result in the FAA “taking action, up to and including, issuing a Notice of Investigation under 14 CFR part 16,” which could lead to in the form of loss of federal funding for the airport.
Commissioner Kelly McNicholas Kury asked if it was known if similar letters of this effect have been sent to other airports. An airport in Heber, Utah, was sent a letter similar to the one Pitkin County received. In this case, the board proactively put to the voters a decision about a project on the airfield.
The Heber, Utah, board ended up removing the question from the ballot.
Commissioner Patti Clapper, however, made it clear that these are two different circumstances. The board in Utah posed the question themselves, but in Pitkin County, a petition garnered enough support to place a question on the November ballot.
“We had no choice by state statute,” she said.
Peacock notes that the FAA’s primary goal is to seek compliance — not punishment. There are several avenues available to the FAA should there be a negative finding in a part 16 complaint.
This is not news to all commissioners, though. Commissioner Francie Jacober said that this is what has been said for six months.
“The only difference is that now we have a letter that specifically states it from Jon. I mean, we’ve known this for a long time,” she said. “I mean, I’ve been saying this for a long time.”
Commissioner Greg Poschman reflected similar sentiments, as this is something the commissioners and airport staff have known for a long time, it is just now being received in a formal letter from the FAA.
“The line that I see in our correspondence that resonates for me, that I think people should listen to, is very simply, the consequences depend upon the severity of the violation,” he said. “And the airport’s response and the outcome of the coming vote is a very clear message to how we’d be responding and puts us in a certain Jeopardy.”
“This doesn’t mean a lot until we have election results,” he went on to say.
The commissioners created their own ballot question, 1C, which seeks to amend Article II of the county’s governing document, the Home Rule Charter, to reaffirm Pitkin County’s power to approve and carry out the layout plan for the Aspen-Pitkin County Airport.
“This is something that the community has been asking us, saying, ‘We don’t hear, we don’t see anything. We don’t see anything in writing,’” Clapper said. “I think this is what the community has been asking for. So here it is. But also, you know, again, I’ll restate that we don’t know what the FAA may do. We know what they could do. So I think this is a really critical letter for the public to be aware of … I think it’s important, I don’t want the voting public to see this letter coming from the BOCC as a threat about question 200. It’s just, this is what we see from the FAA.”
The county also received an award letter for a $200,000 match grant to do a regional sustainable aviation fuel study on the Western Slope. With the grant, Pitkin County’s other $200,000 match, and Mesa County’s $50,000 contribution, this brings the total to $450,000 for the study.
