[BoulderCouncilHotline] Airport Redux

From: Wallach, Mark <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 10:39 AM
Subject: [BoulderCouncilHotline] Airport Redux
To: HOTLINE <[email protected]>

For those of you who have yearned for another Hotline from me, your wishes are hereby granted. For those who would rather not hear from me at all, my sincere condolences.
After reading the materials for this week’s study session on the future of Boulder’s airport (“BDU”), I have a number of comments and questions. I am troubled by several things contained in this week’s presentation and will set out those concerns in this Hotline.
Let me start by saying that there are substantial disagreements within the community as to the future of BDU, and I completely understand that. It is possible to place an entirely different value on the airport than I do, and everyone is entitled to their view. This is a divisive issue. But if Council is to do its job correctly we need to be operating from a common set of facts and assumptions, and I do not feel that this week’s materials lead us to that common understanding. 
My initial concern is that I believe the presentation is skewed towards encouraging the Council to resume taking FAA grants, with little or no discussion of the factors that argue for operating the airport without such grants until 2040, and at least preserving the option for converting it to an alternate use at that time. The decision we are being asked to make extends far beyond the expense we will incur if we do or do not take federal grant funds. Some of those factors are as follows:
1) No Going Back. This decision is irrevocable. It is not merely an extension of 20 years if we take FAA grants. The FAA now takes the position that if we take such grants they do not burn off in 20 years; they are a commitment on the part of the municipality to operate the airport in perpetuity. If we take their money we no longer have any possibility to go down a different path. Forever. The staff memo should have detailed what is clearly a major change in FAA policy, one that is critical to the decision we are called upon to make. The choice described in the memo is not the choice this Council is actually confronted with.
2) Equity? What equity? One of the main concerns with BDU is that the planes spew lead pollution over the surrounding area. But please note that they are not spewing lead on Mapleton Hill or Lower Chautauqua. Rather, it is being sprayed over Vista Village and San Lazaro, manufactured home parks largely occupied by people of lower income and people of color. And despite our efforts to encourage the use of unleaded fuel, there is nothing we can do to compel that usage, and there is nothing to prevent lead-generating planes from other airports from landing and taking off at BDU. Page 9 of the staff memo describes the equity analysis that was conducted in connection with this subject, but does not describe the conclusions reached by that analysis. What were they and do they reflect concern for this problem?
3) 15-minute neighborhoods? This is a major policy of our prospective Comp Plan, but where are those neighborhoods going to go? It is at least worth noting the potential of this property for developing precisely that type of neighborhood, a potential that can only be reached if we decline to take federal grant funds.
4) Middle-income housing that is not in Aurora. We have built almost no for-purchase middle income housing in Boulder. The core purpose in potentially converting the BDU to residential is to do precisely that. Is that not one of the tradeoffs we must consider?
5) The funding gap. At last week’s meeting we were given a written analysis of ways to reduce the projected funding gap through increased fees if we do not pursue FAA grants. Has there been any review of this document? Has there been any independent analysis by staff as to how we might reduce our financial gap through any other measures? Of the anticipated expenditures, how many are discretionary vs. required? And if we do nothing creative and realize a $9MM gap over 15 years, that amount represents .0012% of the total funds we are likely to budget and spend over that time (assuming an annual budget of $500MM/year). I think we can handle it. In addition, that $9MM represents .0025% of the value of the land at $2MM/acre, a figure that is likely to be far higher by 2040. 
6) Environmental remediation. This one is problematic. With essentially no analysis presented, the staff memo states that in the event of a potential change of use of BDU, remediation of the property from prior contamination is estimated to be $10-30 million, but it could go as high as $100 million. Really? I point out that when Stapleton Airport was deconstructed and remediated it was done for $120 million. But Stapleton was 4700 acres, not 179 acres, and had 6 runways handling large jets. Unless the Iranians have been storing their nuclear fuel at BDU, a number of $100 million for cleaning up the airport makes no sense at all. And I want to note that in February of 2025, in response to a question from a Council member, the then-Director of Transportation noted that Chandler Airport in Arizona, a facility of 500 acres and the 6th busiest airport in that state, would incur a $7 million remediation expense and further noted that “staff believes this would exceed remediation costs for Boulder Airport.” And this number has changed why?
7) The 2-runway conundrum. A former airport manager told me in no uncertain terms that the second runway at BDU was non-compliant with FAA standards and that the easiest way to deal with this condition would be to shut the runway down for safety reasons. Is this option available? If not, why not? Have we even examined the possibility? Would it not diminish the funds required to operate the facility? 
8) Airport Economic Impact Study. This is as misleading a supporting document as I have ever come across on Council. It is a 2025 study produced by CDOT purportedly measuring the economic impact of BDU. Except it does not measure the economic impact of BDU on Boulder: every category is based on alleged impacts (and I emphasize the term “alleged”) in the State of Colorado; it has nothing to do with Boulder. So if the airport provides payroll of $10MM, but 2/3 of the employees live elsewhere, the payroll impact is listed as $10MM and then escalated upwards based on multipliers that are entirely obscure. The point is that this survey does not remotely reflect the economic benefits of BDU to Boulder and is almost certainly not an accurate picture of BDU’s economic impact on Colorado. This study really has no place in this presentation.
To summarize (yes, you are almost done reading), there are good reasons to preserve our options to forego federal grants and reinstitute our lawsuit in 2040. If we are then unsuccessful in our legal challenge and are required to operate BDU in perpetuity, we can go forward and grab every available grant with both hands. But if we are successful in our legal challenge, we will have obtained control over an asset that will probably be worth $400-$500MM in 2040 and be free to discuss with the community its best and highest use, even if that use is to continue operations as an airport. But none of that is possible if we return to taking grants, particularly under the FAA’s new policy that doing so automatically requires us to maintain BDU as an airport forever and for always.
 
_______________________________________________
bouldercouncilhotline -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]