Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Eotc Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EOTC seeks written legal guidance on what its transportation tax can fund as members prioritize Brush Creek and Snowmass projects
Summary
At an April 23 EOTC retreat in Aspen, officials reviewed the half‑cent transportation sales tax, heard that annual EOTC revenue is about $2.3 million (plus ~$850,000 in use tax) with roughly $12 million in fund balance, and asked the county attorney for a formal written interpretation of what counts as "mass transportation." Members prioritized Brush Creek park‑and‑ride optimization and the Snowmass transit center while debating whether to expand the tax’s scope.
Elected members of the Elected Officials Transportation Committee met April 23 in Aspen to discuss how to use years of accumulated EOTC funds and whether the committee should broaden what it calls "mass transportation."
The session reviewed the program’s history: a 1993 voter‑approved half‑cent transportation sales and use tax and a 1993 intergovernmental agreement among Pitkin County, the city of Aspen and Snowmass Village to support mass transit across the Roaring Fork Valley. Facilitator Ryan Mahoney said the 2026 approved budget shows annual sales tax revenue of about $2.3 million and use‑tax receipts of roughly $850,000, with a beginning available fund balance around $12 million and $6 million held in reserve for the Snowmass transit center.
Why this matters: members said they want clarity on whether EOTC money can be used beyond what the county attorney preliminarily described as a narrow statutory meaning of "mass transportation," which staff warned likely limits spending to coordinated passenger transit modes. "The statutes specifically define what mass transportation means," Ryan Mahoney said, summarizing staff guidance. Several members asked for a formal written opinion so the committee can determine whether items such as a car‑share app, engineering and design work, parking management, modeling, or Transportation Demand Management efforts could be funded with EOTC money.
Councils and commissioners pressed for detail. "I'd rather have it formally settled than us continue to just say probably not, maybe not," Rachel Richards said, urging the committee to send a precise list of questions to the county attorney. Francie Jacober asked staff to provide a historical accounting of EOTC expenditures; Linda Dupreeest agreed to circulate the 2026 budget and earlier budgets so members can see what has been paid from EOTC funds in prior years.
Priorities and pilot ideas: multiple officials recommended focusing on projects that directly increase ridership, especially maximizing the Brush Creek intercept lot. "A goal for me is maximizing the Brush Creek intercept lot — how do we get there?" the chair said. Tom Fritz Dean urged that the long‑discussed Snowmass transit center remain a priority; staff confirmed $6 million was previously set aside for that project. Members also suggested modeling to test corridor alternatives, targeted employer programs, free‑fare or reduced‑fare pilots from lower‑valley park‑and‑rides, and first/last‑mile shuttle pilots.
Ballot and statewide risks: members raised concern about an active statewide ballot measure that could redefine transportation funding statewide. "This ballot 1‑75 ... redefines what transportation is," one member said, warning that a state change could narrow what local transportation taxes may fund.
Next steps: the committee asked staff to compile and submit a clear written list of candidate uses to the county attorney for formal interpretation, circulate the current and recent budgets to all members, and invite the Transportation Coalition or RFTA to present data and recommendations at jurisdictional meetings or the next EOTC meeting. Staff committed to return with the county attorney’s written guidance and specific budget lines at the July meeting or earlier if available.
No binding votes were taken during the retreat; members framed the session as preparatory work to inform a future, well‑scoped strategic plan and any potential ballot language.
