The price to drive up Pikes Peak could rise next summer under a proposal that comes at a time of other changes, increased costs and future concerns for the enterprise managing the famed highway.

Pikes Peak-America’s Mountain — the enterprise established out of the city of Colorado Springs’ operations dating to 1948 — has proposed an extra $3 for people passing the Pikes Peak Highway gate. That would increase adult and children tickets to $18 and $8, respectively.

Under the proposal, the charge for a carload of people would be $65, up $15. Ranging from punch cards to unlimited entry, season passes would also go up $15, with products costing between $130 and $240.

Pikes Peak-America’s Mountain Manager Skyler Rorabaugh projected the increases would add another $1.16 million to the enterprise’s annual budget, which he said has hovered around $9.6 million in recent years. The budget largely depends on toll fees, with other revenues coming from Summit Visitor Center concessionaire Aramark and special event contracts.

The City Council Budget Committee is slated to hear the proposal at its June 25 meeting.

Pikes Peak Highway fees have not increased since 2017, read a summary presented to the city’s parks board earlier this month.

“In the past, we have managed to balance our revenue and expenses,” the summary read. “However, the rising economic costs, the need for increased staffing due to sustained visitation growth and the increase in operational costs will exceed our current finances.”

While the $3 price increase was not enough to upset him, Steve Bremner questioned the need. A longtime driver of the highway and president of nonprofit Friends of the Peak, Bremner spoke to that visitation growth — reportedly close to 500,000 in recent years, up from numbers closer to 350,000 a decade ago.

“If they have use of the road increasing by a substantial amount, (the ticket revenues) should be enough for them,” Bremner said. “They’re just taking advantage of supply and demand, and I guess they can keep cranking up the price until demand goes down.”

But that demand is directly tied to higher costs, Rorabaugh said — more visitors meaning more staff to meet them, more wear on the road meaning more maintenance. Costs for jobs, staff, insurance and specialized equipment and vehicles are up 20%-30%, he said, in line with the proposed price increases.

Drivers this summer are also paying an extra $2 for reservations in a new timed entry system. Those drive-yourself reservations are being limited in an attempt to ensure parking at the summit, while others can board a shuttle going to the top from mile 7, with no other stops along the way.

That drew criticism from some locals, who saw their access to hiking, biking, climbing and skiing destinations greatly altered. Before 9 a.m., they can drive where they’d like without a reservation, but they must show a season pass — what some critics saw as a “cash grab.”

While Rorabaugh said he hopes to find a shuttle operator able to make more stops next summer, it’s “an imperfect system” this summer, said Trails and Open Space Coalition Executive Director Susan Davies.

She sympathized with Rorabaugh, who took the manager job in 2022.

“He doesn’t want to make it cost-prohibitive, he doesn’t want to keep locals from their mountain,” Davies said. “At the same time, the enterprise has to make money to operate, that’s the definition of an enterprise. And they’re still paying for construction up there.”

She was referring to bond payments the enterprise has been making since 2018, when the City Council agreed to financing to build the Summit Visitor Center.

Those payments amount to about $2 million every year, Rorabaugh said. “About a quarter of our budget,” he noted, and due for the next 25 years.

Praised as state-of-the-art after a reported $60 million-plus upon opening in 2021, there have been other costs in the wake of the facility. One was the $2.95 million to GE Johnson in a legal settlement with the contractor, which claimed payments due while the city claimed shoddy work. Upon settling last year, the agreement was one “both parties believe is fair,” Rorabaugh said in a statement.

“It’s a wonderful facility,” he said recently, “but with that comes additional staff resources to maintain it, as well as more operational dollars to maintain a facility like that.”

Automated systems for heating, security and wastewater come with contracts for software updates and maintenance checks, Rorabaugh said. He said significant investments were still needed for that unfinished wastewater system and parking lot, the infrastructure central to the city’s countersuit against GE Johnson last year.

The new summit house was overdue and something to be admired, said Bob Falcone, a local advocate who has sat on several parks boards and committees. “And it’s like anything else, they couldn’t pay for that with tax money,” he said.

He recognized Pikes Peak as being home to a complex web of interests, spanning land managers to commercial operators to tourists and locals seeking different points across the massif. While the years have seen different ideas for management — the National Park Service and, more recently, Colorado Parks and Wildlife — Falcone has appreciated the enterprise for not relying on taxpayers.

Yet “it’s locally controlled,” he said, “and we don’t have to necessarily deal with a different level of government.”

Davies couldn’t help but wonder about the arrangement following a recent parks board meeting, where tight budgets were discussed regarding other enterprises over city golf courses and cemeteries.

“I think anytime somebody says an enterprise is the way to go, be careful,” she said. “Be careful, because things can come up.”

Things like natural disasters, which Rorabaugh sees as a perennial threat to Pikes Peak-America’s Mountain.

“I hate to say this, but we’re a fire away or having something that would just be catastrophic to our bottom line,” he said. “I really think it’s important we diversify our revenue streams to where we can complete what we have now, where we can disperse that recreation and ultimately protect this wonderful resource we have beyond the (highway) gateway.”

He declined to speak further on those potential revenue streams. “It’s just really appropriate that I navigate with our partners first,” he said.

The price to drive up Pikes Peak could rise next summer under a proposal that comes at a time of other changes, increased costs and future concerns for the enterprise managing the famed highway.

Pikes Peak-America’s Mountain — the enterprise established out of the city of Colorado Springs’ operations dating to 1948 — has proposed an extra $3 for people passing the Pikes Peak Highway gate. That would increase adult and children tickets to $18 and $8, respectively.

Under the proposal, the charge for a carload of people would be $65, up $15. Ranging from punch cards to unlimited entry, season passes would also go up $15, with products costing between $130 and $240.

Pikes Peak-America’s Mountain Manager Skyler Rorabaugh projected the increases would add another $1.16 million to the enterprise’s annual budget, which he said has hovered around $9.6 million in recent years. The budget largely depends on toll fees, with other revenues coming from Summit Visitor Center concessionaire Aramark and special event contracts.

The City Council Budget Committee is slated to hear the proposal at its June 25 meeting.

Pikes Peak Highway fees have not increased since 2017, read a summary presented to the city’s parks board earlier this month.

“In the past, we have managed to balance our revenue and expenses,” the summary read. “However, the rising economic costs, the need for increased staffing due to sustained visitation growth and the increase in operational costs will exceed our current finances.”

While the $3 price increase was not enough to upset him, Steve Bremner questioned the need. A longtime driver of the highway and president of nonprofit Friends of the Peak, Bremner spoke to that visitation growth — reportedly close to 500,000 in recent years, up from numbers closer to 350,000 a decade ago.

“If they have use of the road increasing by a substantial amount, (the ticket revenues) should be enough for them,” Bremner said. “They’re just taking advantage of supply and demand, and I guess they can keep cranking up the price until demand goes down.”

But that demand is directly tied to higher costs, Rorabaugh said — more visitors meaning more staff to meet them, more wear on the road meaning more maintenance. Costs for jobs, staff, insurance and specialized equipment and vehicles are up 20%-30%, he said, in line with the proposed price increases.

Drivers this summer are also paying an extra $2 for reservations in a new timed entry system. Those drive-yourself reservations are being limited in an attempt to ensure parking at the summit, while others can board a shuttle going to the top from mile 7, with no other stops along the way.

That drew criticism from some locals, who saw their access to hiking, biking, climbing and skiing destinations greatly altered. Before 9 a.m., they can drive where they’d like without a reservation, but they must show a season pass — what some critics saw as a “cash grab.”

While Rorabaugh said he hopes to find a shuttle operator able to make more stops next summer, it’s “an imperfect system” this summer, said Trails and Open Space Coalition Executive Director Susan Davies.

She sympathized with Rorabaugh, who took the manager job in 2022.

“He doesn’t want to make it cost-prohibitive, he doesn’t want to keep locals from their mountain,” Davies said. “At the same time, the enterprise has to make money to operate, that’s the definition of an enterprise. And they’re still paying for construction up there.”

She was referring to bond payments the enterprise has been making since 2018, when the City Council agreed to financing to build the Summit Visitor Center.

Those payments amount to about $2 million every year, Rorabaugh said. “About a quarter of our budget,” he noted, and due for the next 25 years.

Praised as state-of-the-art after a reported $60 million-plus upon opening in 2021, there have been other costs in the wake of the facility. One was the $2.95 million to GE Johnson in a legal settlement with the contractor, which claimed payments due while the city claimed shoddy work. Upon settling last year, the agreement was one “both parties believe is fair,” Rorabaugh said in a statement.

“It’s a wonderful facility,” he said recently, “but with that comes additional staff resources to maintain it, as well as more operational dollars to maintain a facility like that.”

Automated systems for heating, security and wastewater come with contracts for software updates and maintenance checks, Rorabaugh said. He said significant investments were still needed for that unfinished wastewater system and parking lot, the infrastructure central to the city’s countersuit against GE Johnson last year.

The new summit house was overdue and something to be admired, said Bob Falcone, a local advocate who has sat on several parks boards and committees. “And it’s like anything else, they couldn’t pay for that with tax money,” he said.

He recognized Pikes Peak as being home to a complex web of interests, spanning land managers to commercial operators to tourists and locals seeking different points across the massif. While the years have seen different ideas for management — the National Park Service and, more recently, Colorado Parks and Wildlife — Falcone has appreciated the enterprise for not relying on taxpayers.

Yet “it’s locally controlled,” he said, “and we don’t have to necessarily deal with a different level of government.”

Davies couldn’t help but wonder about the arrangement following a recent parks board meeting, where tight budgets were discussed regarding other enterprises over city golf courses and cemeteries.

“I think anytime somebody says an enterprise is the way to go, be careful,” she said. “Be careful, because things can come up.”

Things like natural disasters, which Rorabaugh sees as a perennial threat to Pikes Peak-America’s Mountain.

“I hate to say this, but we’re a fire away or having something that would just be catastrophic to our bottom line,” he said. “I really think it’s important we diversify our revenue streams to where we can complete what we have now, where we can disperse that recreation and ultimately protect this wonderful resource we have beyond the (highway) gateway.”

He declined to speak further on those potential revenue streams. “It’s just really appropriate that I navigate with our partners first,” he said.