Aspen voters urged to support Referendum 2

Westley Crouch/The Aspen Times
Editor’s note: This is an ongoing series on referendums, mayoral, and Aspen City Council candidates where they have a chance to make their arguments to the readers.
Proponents of Referendum 2 are urging voters to support the measure, arguing that approving Referendum 1 would only prolong the decades-long debate over the Entrance to Aspen.
Referendum 2 seeks to amend Aspen’s Home Rule Charter, allowing the Colorado Department of Transportation to use specific portions of the Marolt and Thomas properties for realigning Colorado Highway 82. This would be in line with the 1998 Entrance to Aspen Record of Decision for the Preferred Alternative or any new alternative that emerges from a fresh Environmental Impact Statement.
Referendum 2 opponents claim it would give CDOT unrestricted access to all 79.5 acres of Marolt and Thomas Open Space. Rachel Richards, a former city council member and current mayoral candidate, dismissed that claim as a scare tactic.
“What we are talking about is a sliver of land through Marolt Open Space. It is 2.9 total (acres) of the 79.5 acres,” Richards said. “We’re talking about 5.4 acres to be used for highway and 2.5 to be returned through the land bridge.”
City Councilmember Ward Hauenstein, another supporter of the measure, said that without Referendum 2, a second bridge over Castle Creek would not happen.
“For me, throughout this whole process, if we cannot have four lanes of the highway for vehicles and mass transit, it is a non-starter,” Hauenstein said. “In order to get four lanes, whether it’s a split-shot, a modified split-shot, or any of those, it requires a second bridge.”
Hauenstein said the measure simply secures the use of that land for transportation.
“The original Record of Decision allows two lanes of buses interim until we have a light rail. What we want is for CDOT to be granted the use in perpetuity of buses,” he said. “The community, I think, has accepted that a light rail is not possible at the moment. Seattle is looking at a cost for a light rail at over $200 million a mile. Economically, for a population of 6,700 people, it’s just not possible.”
He argued that opponents of the measure are making assumptions about potential alternatives for Marolt Open Space and that Referendum 2 ensures land use for either the existing Preferred Alternative or a better one defined by the community in the future.
“What we are doing at the city is going through a process with CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration to convince them that there is enough new evidence, through a new Purpose and Needs, that the Record of Decision needs to be reopened through a new EIS process,” Hauenstein said. “It’s the sales pitch. If CDOT isn’t convinced that there is nothing better, the EIS will not be opened.”
If CDOT agrees to a new EIS, environmental impacts and community input will shape a new Record of Decision, potentially introducing a different Preferred Alternative.
Richards stressed that Referendum 2 keeps the option of a second bridge through Marolt Open Space in play.
“Let’s keep the option on the table as part of the conversation for what the best Entrance to Aspen option is,” she said. “Technically, the purpose and needs will look at changed travel patterns, changes in the commuting workforce, the implementation of the bus rapid transit system, and the increased dangers of wildfire — which were not talked about much in 1998 when the current Record of Decision was implemented.”
She said a community survey showed Aspen residents support mass transit, using Marolt Open Space for traffic solutions, and prioritizing wildfire safety.
“Wildfire and emergency access showed significant support in the community survey,” Richards said. “We do not want to use wildfire as a scare tactic for passing Referendum 2. The city of Aspen Open Space and Trails advisory board voted to oppose Referendum 1 because they felt the existing 50/50 vote has already been there and the need for a like-kind replacement is there. They need the tools to be able to work expeditiously.”
Proponents of Referendum 2 argue that Referendum 1, which would raise the voter approval threshold for certain open space changes from 50% plus one to 60% plus one, would cause unnecessary delays — not just for the Entrance to Aspen but also for replacing the existing Castle Creek Bridge.
“The Open Space and Trails advisory board needs to be able to work expeditiously when working with a landowner to secure a trail easement or any improvement to open space and not have to wait two years for a general election,” Richards said. “Right now, we are seeing a pretty even split among community members over any changes to Aspen’s open space, and going with a 60% threshold would only create gridlock, and nothing would be done.”
She warned that Referendum 1 would effectively stall progress on the Entrance to Aspen and the Castle Creek Bridge.
“Referendum 1 is very vague and broadly written and rife with unintended consequences,” she said. “It is an unnecessary layer on top of the protections we already have with our open space. It’s going to lead to a cascade of lawsuits that taxpayers are on the hook for. Very important projects can easily be held up or prevented.”
To learn more about Referendum 2, visit http://www.aspen4action.com, or email connect@aspen4action.com.
Pitkin County Solid Waste ‘visionary’ Cathy Hall to leave
Solid waste management in Pitkin county took some drastic changes for the better when Cathy Hall took the reins nearly 12 years ago.
Colorado U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert leads effort to remove federal protections from gray wolves
Gray wolves could be removed from the federal Endangered Species Act under a bill reintroduced by Republican U.S. Reps. Lauren Boebert of Colorado and Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin on Friday.