ROARING FORK BROADCASTING COMPANY
Opponents of runway expansion at Aspen-Pitkin County Airport took an important first step Tuesday to potentially force a ballot question in November’s election, but their strategy is raising more questions than answers.
Expansion foes submitted wording for three separate petitions with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office. The clerk’s staff will review the petitions to make sure they meet legal requirements. Once they are certified, they can start gathering signatures. If enough signatures are gathered, the proposals would head to the Nov. 5 election.
It’s uncertain if the expansion foes plan to gather signatures on all three petitions or if they are keeping their options open and assessing which of the three routes to take. Each of the proposed petitions asks for an amendment to the Pitkin County Home Rule Charter, which defines how the county government operates.
The petition wording was filed by Denver attorney Nate Bruggeman of the firm Recht Kornfeld PC. The petitions listed Chuck Butler as one of the representatives of the circulating group. Butler is also the frontman of the group Citizens Against Bigger Planes. Neither Bruggeman nor Butler returned repeated messages from the Aspen Daily News before deadline time on Tuesday seeking clarity on their strategy.
Pitkin County Assistant Attorney Richard Neiley said he received nothing from Bruggeman that indicated how many ballot questions they will pursue.
“Three is no doubt confusing,” Neiley said. “There’s no doubt they can pursue one or all of them and what they ultimately choose to pursue is up to them.”
Signatures would have to be collected individually on each petition, he said. One signature couldn’t be applied to each of the three petitions.
The summary for the first proposed petition seeks an amendment to the Home Rule Charter “to specify that the Board of County Commissioners does not have the power or duty to expand or relocate any runway at the Aspen-Pitkin County Airport beyond runway dimensions and locations that existed on January 1, 2024, unless approved by the a majority of Commissioners following an independent engineering assessment that considers possible repairs to the existing runway and establishes whether there is a need for runway expansion or relocation based on safety concerns of the flying public and residents of and visitors to Pitkin County.”
The majority of commissioners have already voted to support a plan which would move the runway 80 feet to the west of its current location and expand the width from 100 feet to 150 feet. The commissioners voted 4-1 on May 2 to update an Airport Layout Plan and submit it to the Federal Aviation Administration with the relocated and expanded runway proposal. The majority of commissioners said they feared the prospect of losing millions of dollars of federal grants for airport improvements if the runway wasn’t relocated.
Citizens Against Bigger Planes and allied groups and individuals contend a bigger runway will court larger commercial and private aircraft and generate more growth and noise. They want the runway width to remain at 100 feet along with a prohibition on aircraft with a wingspan exceeding 95 feet.
The other two proposed petitions weren’t as long or obtuse as the first. The summary of the second petition submitted Tuesday says that the board of commissioners “does not have the power or duty to approve any change to the Aspen-Pitkin County Airport that permits aircraft with a wingspan of greater than 95 feet to land at or depart from the Airport.”
The third proposed petition says the board “does not have the power or duty to expand or relocate any runway at the Aspen-Pitkin County Airport beyond the runway dimensions and locations that existed on January 1, 2024, unless the expansion or relocation is approved by the voters of Pitkin County.”
In effect, the third petition would force an election that would require the county to send any runway expansion proposal to a future ballot.
Butler has said in previous interviews that his group preferred that the commissioners would voluntarily refer a question to the ballot. The commissioners discussed that possibility in a closed session last week and determined they needed much more information before reaching a conclusion. The runway expansion foes don’t have a lot of time to wait for answers. Ballot language must be set by Sept. 6.
The citizens’ challenge will be less formidable seeking an amendment to the Home Rule Charter rather than launching the more direct initiative petition drive to force a question on the ballot. An initiative petition would have required roughly 1,520 signatures — 10% of the total registered voters at the last general election in 2020.
An amendment to the charter sets a lower bar. The petition or petitions would only have to be signed by 5% of the current registered voters of Pitkin County. That would be about 750.
Pitkin County Clerk Ingrid Grueter said the petition group would have 90 days total once the petition wording is certified to collect signatures, get them reviewed by the clerk’s office and cure any deficiencies.
Little is known about the money behind Citizens Against Bigger Planes or the depth of its support. If the petitions lead to a ballot question, the group would be required to file campaign committee disclosure and financial reports. Butler is listed in the petitions as a representative of the effort along with Jarrod Hollinger and Timothy Mooney, both of Aspen.