Snowmass council Q&A: incumbent Tom Fridstein

Snowmass Town Council candidates Art Burrows, Debbie Alcorta, Cecily DeAngelo, and incumbent Tom Fridstein vie for two open council seats as the Nov. 5 election approaches. The Aspen Times asked each candidate about key issues in the town. 

Fridstein runs for a second term on council, after serving his first from 2020 to 2024. 

The Aspen Times: Why have you chosen to serve the Snowmass community in the past, and why do you seek to serve the community in the future?

---

---

Tom Fridstein: As a longtime community member, former chairman of our Planning Commission, and architect who designed award-winning buildings around the world, I understand Snowmass Village is more than just a place to live — it is a community steeped in character, where the natural beauty of our surroundings inspires us. I am running for a second term on Town Council because I care deeply about Snowmass Village and want to continue to contribute my knowledge, experience, and diligence to benefit all its residents and visitors. 

In my first term on council, I worked tirelessly to maintain that critical balance in accommodating necessary growth in the village while preserving the natural and genuine aspects of the community that make it truly special. I have been a knowledgeable problem solver and thoughtful leader as the council has engaged in issues, including: early childhood education, short-term rentals, employee housing, the transit center, property taxes, and the design of the new Little Red Schoolhouse building.

---

---

AT: Are you in favor of or opposed to Snowmass ballot question 2D, which would determine funding for the proposed 79-unit, $86 million employee housing project at the Draw Site adjacent to Town Hall? Why?

TF: Additional workforce housing is essential to the viability of our village, but it must be created in a smart and thoughtful way. The 79-unit, $86 million proposal for the Draw Site is deeply flawed and should not be built. The site is very steep and narrow and not a fit place for 200 people to live. Instead of this proposal for two slab towers connected by a two-story underground parking garage with disastrous entry conditions, we should build one building with 40-50 units, on-grade parking, and outdoor space for the residents. This smaller project could be built and occupied a year earlier. I encourage a “no” vote on ballot question 2D to force town staff to create a better solution. A special election can be held at any time to approve this smaller project.

The town is negotiating to purchase the land above the Snowmass Center for workforce housing. This would be a far superior place to build housing and create a wonderful community adjacent to the amenities and transit at the Snowmass Center. By building a smaller project on the Draw Site, the town will have more resources to devote to this much better location above the center.

AT: Are you in favor of or opposed to Pitkin County ballot question 1A, which would raise county property taxes by 1.5 mills over 25 years, providing an estimated $8.5 million in additional funding per year for affordable housing, but creating an estimated property tax increase of $121 for private properties valued at $1 million and $435 for commercial properties valued at $1 million? Why?

TF: I am deeply concerned regarding the recent large increases in property tax on our full-time and part-time residents. Many owners bought their homes when prices were affordable and are now saddled with large property taxes each year although their income may not have increased or may have even reduced. Last year, I initiated a proposal at Town Council to reduce the discretionary mills levy to lessen the impact of the property tax increases.

Although I am hesitant to increase taxes, I am in favor of ballot question 1A because we must build more workforce housing in our valley. The enormous price increase for market-sector homes has made it nearly impossible for the workforce that is essential for our existence as a community to purchase a home. We must be creative and diligent in exploring all viable options to increase workforce housing. The 1.5 mills levy seems a reasonable investment in our future.

AT: Are you in favor of moving the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport runway 80 feet to the west and widening it from 100 to 150 feet? Why? Are you in favor of Pitkin County ballot question 200, which would allow residents to vote on the expansion or movement of the runway, or Pitkin County ballot question 1C, which would reaffirm county officials’ ability to approve and implement changes to the physical layout of the airport on behalf of the community?

TF: As a member of the ASE Vision Committee, I spent 16 months with 125 fellow citizens discussing, researching, and making informed recommendations to Pitkin County regarding the airport’s future. I believe we have no choice but to build the new runway as required by the FAA. While not in favor of any increase in air operations or larger aircraft, these potential negatives are outweighed by the risk of not having a runway able to accommodate commercial aircraft in 20 years when the E-175 planes being deployed in December need to be replaced. Additionally, the airport would not have the funds to pay for both the new runway and a new terminal without FAA funding, which likely would be denied if the FAA compliant runway was not built.

The county opened the discussion of the airport to the entire community in the ASE visioning process, and the community made their recommendation to build the new runway to FAA requirements. I believe the county commissioners have researched this issue and solicited community input. Because the county encouraged extensive community engagement over the past several years, I believe we need to move forward with a decision and am not supportive of question 200.

AT: Are you in favor of or opposed to the construction of more available parking and RFTA transit options at the Snowmass Mall? If so, how should the project be designed?

TF: Snowmass Village needs a new transit hub at the mall that is safe, convenient, and attractive and that integrates the inter-city RFTA buses and the Village Shuttles in one location. Many proposals have been suggested, but the best and only viable solution is a two-level structure with RFTA buses at the mall level and Village Shuttles below at the Daly Lane level. It could be constructed in phases, so that access to the shops and businesses on the mall is never disrupted.

We should not reduce the parking spaces in the numbered lots. This can be easily achieved with the two-level transit hub by simply extending the top level of Lot 5 at minimal cost and minimal visual impact.

Our unique and special village deserves a first-rate unified transit center which will improve user experience and reduce the use of private cars.

Skyler Stark-Ragsdale can be reached at 970-429-9152 or email him at sstark-ragsdale@aspentimes.com.