What About The May Election?

Will this affect the voter approval for bus lanes that Aspen voters passed in 2007?

The May, 2007, voter approval will be altered only so far as the wording on the signs alongside the highway. However, if the Entrance Solution proposals are accepted, the altered signs will be significant to highway users because the two new lanes will not be restricted to buses only. By making the increased highway capacity available to the general public, the mile long traffic backups we’ve been experiencing for so long will finally be gone.

What about the claim that any alteration of the approvals will require an additional two years and two million dollars for a Supplemental EIS and a new Record of Decision?

While there may be some proposals out there for which that might be true, it does not apply to either of the proposals we are offering. Remember, the federal courts have already ruled on this issue in a lawsuit filed by the Friends of Marolt Park:

“The Agency has determined a supplemental EIS is not required where the ROD selects an option not identified as the preferred option in the final EIS, as long as the selected option was fully evaluated. 23 C.F.R. §§ 771.130(a)(1),(b)(2); See Marsh, 490 U.S. at 374 (noting that a supplemental EIS is only required where the impacts of new decision have not already been considered)."

All of the elements of the two designs for which we seek voter approval survived the various screening processes of the Environmental Impact Statement process, and most were reviewed in the recently completed written reevaluation process.

What if the Aspen city council refuses to request the necessary approvals?

We are currently working on a county wide initiative to finance Entrance to Aspen construction. In the past, we have been reimbursed by the state from future years’ budgets when highway improvements are initially funded locally.

What does that have to do with the city requesting approvals?

The EIS process is only necessary to qualify for federal funding. By using local tax sources we don’t actually need to satisfy that process to proceed with construction. Consequently, inaction or obstruction on the part of city council will not delay a start date, but it could interfere with the ability of the county to work out a reimbursement plan with the state. We would like to think that the Aspen city council won’t do anything that silly.

What if the Pitkin County commissioners refuse to proceed with a financing proposal approved by county voters?

There’s another county election in November of 2010.

Back to Entrance to Aspen Home