Aspen City Council unanimously approved three ordinances restructuring the city’s banner and flag regulations at the February 10 meeting, moving oversight from land use codes to engineering standards while increasing fees from $540 to $1,200 weekly for light pole flags and from $63 to $150 weekly for street banners. The council also selected 520 Grill for the city-subsidized restaurant space at 455 Rio Grande Place after Councillor Bill Guth recused himself due to ethics conflicts. Staff presented the fee increases as cost recovery for installation work requiring two-person crews working 8-10 hours per banner, and Mayor Rachael Richards suggested phased implementation to soften the impact on community organizations. The changes move to second reading March 10, when final approval is expected.
Banner Regulation Overhaul
Development Services Analyst Lorena Vargas, Deputy City Engineer Hailey Roedel, and Planner I Tillie Pines presented the triple ordinance package on first reading. Ordinance #01 removes banner and flag regulations from Title 26 of the land use code, Ordinance #02 relocates them to Title 21 covering streets and sidewalks and Title 29 covering engineering design standards, and Ordinance #03 updates fees in Title 2.
The banner program includes 30 light pole locations on Main Street and downtown core for flags, plus banner space over Main Street at Third Street accommodating eight single-sided or four double-sided banners. Vargas said the program will shift to mesh banners only to reduce structural strain on trees, moving away from vinyl materials currently permitted.
Banner fees have not changed in over a decade, according to staff. Roedel explained light pole flag installation requires a two-person crew working eight hours plus two to three additional administrative hours, bringing the true cost to between $1,000 and $1,400 per reservation. The new $1,200 weekly flag fee represents $40 per flag for the 30 available poles.
Richards acknowledged the scale of the increases. Council approved the first reading 5-0 with no modifications despite the mayor’s phased implementation suggestion.
520 Grill Selected for Restaurant Space
Council selected 520 Grill 4-0 for the restaurant space at 455 Rio Grande Place, with Guth recusing himself entirely from the discussion and vote. City Attorney Katharine Johnson explained Guth serves on a homeowners association board that has a relationship with 520 Grill, requiring his recusal under the city’s ethics rules.
Councillor Christine Benedetti said she evaluated risk and reward in making the decision, choosing 520 Grill as the least risky option. Benedetti noted 520 Grill received positive financial analysis from city staff and presented creative ideas to increase volume and achieve success in the subsidized space. She emphasized the space comes with community expectations for affordability given the city subsidy.
The restaurant lease will return to council for final approval once contract terms are completed.
Council Reports and State Budget
Richards reported on the Voices of Rural Colorado event in Denver, where she met with Speaker of the House Julie McCluskie. Richards said the state legislature is reconciling a $1.1 billion budget deficit this year after emptying reserves last year, with more cuts expected after the March economic update.
Richards also discussed a citizen initiative campaign called Restore Our Roads No New Taxes, which would reallocate general fund sales tax revenues related to automobile purchases to road-only funding. Richards said the measure would take $300 million from the general fund in the first year, requiring additional cuts to K-12 education, mental health services, Medicaid reimbursements, higher education, and courts. She urged residents to decline signing the petition.
Council members reported on the Colorado Association of Ski Towns meeting in Salida, which included touring 3D-printed concrete homes constructed in six days at 35 percent lower cost than traditional construction.
Public Comment
Gary Lauder and former Mayor Torre addressed council during public comment. Lauder urged the city to continue analyzing alternatives to the preferred Entrance to Aspen plan, arguing the alternatives were never properly evaluated and the preferred alternative was designed to maintain traffic congestion. Lauder said he offered to fund analysis by Jacobs Engineering on behalf of the city but the city declined.
Former Mayor Torre requested city support for the community mental health fund after HeadQuarters, the organization previously distributing the funds, ceased operations. Torre said the fund distributes approximately $200,000 annually for direct mental health services and asked council for a $50,000 to $100,000 annual commitment, noting the county and hospital are also discussing support.
Torre also raised concerns about Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority’s proposed elimination of work priority in rental applications and encouraged continued analysis of Entrance to Aspen alternatives. Torre noted the city has previously supported the mental health fund through tobacco tax revenue and other sources.
Other Business
Council unanimously approved the consent calendar including a contract with Source Office & Technology Partners for Parks Office furniture remodel and January 27 meeting minutes.
Council voted 5-0 to enter executive session on real property negotiations at undisclosed locations and regarding water rights Case No. 2025CW3177 in District Court Water Division No. 5 concerning applications by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, Public Service Company of Colorado, and Colorado River Water Conservation District in Garfield and Eagle Counties.
Council members present were Mayor Richards, Councilors Christine Benedetti, John Doyle, Bill Guth, and Sam Rose. City Manager Pete Strecker, City Clerk Nicole Henning, and City Attorney Katharine Johnson also attended.
Support Independent Local Journalism — High Country Advocate was created as a real alternative to regional media that too often silences dissenting voices while taking sides in the political struggle. Producing in-depth, unflinching reporting like this series and others is expensive: servers, editing, research time, and legal review all add up quickly. If these articles have informed you or given you new perspective, please consider supporting HCA with a paid subscription — every subscriber helps keep this reporting strong and independent. 