AURORA | Aurora lawmakers won’t be asking voters for pay raises for themselves and the mayor this fall.
City council members said public backlash to a plan to hike their annual pay by about 50% prompted them to drop the referendum for the November ballot.
“There does need to be an increase, and also an increase that will pass by the voters,” Mayor Mike Coffman said concerning his and other councilmembers’ successors. “ I think that there is just kind of a threshold that, and I think I’m not sure where that is, but I think if you go over that, it’s going to reflect poorly.”
In the past, city lawmakers raised their own pay, but current lawmakers said they think it’s important to ask voters for a raise rather than grant it themselves.
The city council council is advisory and lawmakers are part time, although many say the position consumes many hours. Aurora’s mayor is a full-time position, but the office holds no administrative powers or duties.
The decision not to ask voters came among a bevy of questions being referred to voters this fall, the rest of which were moved onto the ballot by lawmakers last week.
The quashed proposal would have raised council member pay to 50% of what county commissioners make. The measure also would increase the mayor’s salary to 100% of the same pay as commissioners. Arapahoe and Adams county commissioners are paid a nearly $150,000 annual salary, as set by state law. Currently, city council members get approximately $32,000, and the mayor earns $98,000 annually.
If the voters had approved the proposed referendum, city council members would have more than doubled their pay, and the mayor would have received a 50% raise on top of his current salary.
City council members argued all sides of the issue before killing the question.
The mayor proposed eliminating the language regarding the mayor’s pay, but retaining the language regarding council members’ pay.
Councilmember Danielle Jurinsky proposed an amendment that would preclude basing raises on county salaries and instead just give each city lawmaker a 50% raise.
That drew arguments about council members appearing to vote on their own pay increases.
Lawmakers debate whether more pay is even necessary for a part-time job, and since many people who hold office also have full-time jobs with their council positions, it is not essential to pay a full-time living wage for people who choose to only serve on city council. There was also mention of the fact that the city is experiencing a budget shortfall, so some lawmakers were concerned that they would come off as tone-deaf to give themselves raises at this time.
“Public service is public service, and we shouldn’t be doing it for the money to begin with,” Councilmember Françoise Bergan said.
Other council members pointed out that the salary doesn’t even come close to allowing someone to live off the job, and that the low pay might also deter qualified candidates from running for the office. Many of the positions held by different council members were not partisan, but rather personal perspectives for themselves and other prospective council members.
“The majority of us have full time jobs, aside from our jobs here on the City Council, and the fact of the matter is, we would like to expand the pool so more people could step up to serve, but we don’t want it to be such that, you know, it’s so low that they couldn’t even qualify for an apartment based on their own salary on the city council,” Councilmember Stephanie Hancock said.
After a few other failed amendments and a sometimes contentious debate, the city council ultimately voted against asking voters anything about raises.
Councilmembers Coombs, Amsalu Kassaw and Crystal Murillo were the only three members to approve asking voters for a raise this year.
Other charter changes that were approved by city council to go on the ballot
Aurora lawmakers are considering asking voters to approve a host of city charter amendments with proponents saying they would modernize outdated provisions, improve clarity and promote fairness.
If all are approved by city council, the measures would appear on the November ballot.
The proposed changes encompass a range of topics, from gender-neutral language to council vacancies and term limits.
One of the proposed measures would update city charter with gender-neutral language.
City Attorney Pete Schulte said that his staff carefully reviewed all 20 pages of the charter and identified each section containing gender-specific terms. These would be updated without altering the intent or meaning of any provision.
Another proposal would address how vacancies on city council are filled, depending on the timing of the vacancy. The city council may appoint a qualified person to serve for up to two years, or call a special or regular election, which would add clarity to when appointments versus elections are used, Schulte said. This would influence when or if a councilmember will step down, and whether the rest of city council can reappoint.
Currently, the charter requires the city manager to live within city limits. A proposed amendment would eliminate that requirement, giving the city council discretion to decide residency conditions at the time of appointment. Schulte said this was intended to change what he said is an archaic rule.
“That would be a decision for council to make upon making the appointment, versus having a requirement in the charter,” Schulte said.
Another proposed amendment would remove a ban that prohibits elected city officials from holding another elected public office. It would allow voters to decide if a person can serve in more than one part-time elected position, Schulte said. This would not apply to full-time roles such as a county commissioner due to constitutional restrictions.
Coombs said she did not support the proposed charter change because it could create many different conflicts of interest.
The final proposal clarifies term limits for ward and at-large council members. Currently, the charter does not distinguish between the two as separate offices, requiring a councilmember to “take a break” between serving a term in a ward and serving one at-large after reaching term limits.
Bergan said it was simply “eliminating the break.”
This change would allow a councilmember who has served 12 years in a ward seat to immediately run for an at-large seat without a break, Schulte said. The mayor position is already set up in this way, allowing a ward or at-large council member to run for mayor after serving 12 years in their previous position. If voters approve it, ward and at-large term limits would be considered separate. If not, the current charter remains, Schulte said.
“That would help us understand moving forward, what the voters think,” Schulte said
“Other council members pointed out that the salary doesn’t even come close to allowing someone to live off the job”: member when they voted against raising the minimum wage by a dollar a year over multiple years? Just sayin
It’s always nice to see politicians working hard for the benefit of society. We hope these politicians bring those hard learned life experiences to the table they have gained during their career. And we would expect their opinions to somewhat reflect their ideology they’ve developed with their economic and political theory’s. We had several on council that felt a raise would be in order and so the public should decide. One that felt a stronger salary is not unreasonable for taxpayers and voted to put it up for public consideration. From day one this EMERGE grad has always taken the socialist position on economic fairness and that it’s these rich folks always want more. These rich folks are always making us poor folks pay their way. She better than most understands getting the public to vote on things is how to achieve these goals to gain wealth using political influence. I find it interesting her real job is one that works at teaching people how and who to vote for. And as a progressive executive she does pretty well. A search tool the IRS has provided looking for information for any 501 non-profits is essential. The IRS Form 990 for non- profits indicates that Colorado Peoples Alliance is still active. In 2024, we see Crystal Murillo and her salary, $115,535 for her as their Interim Exec whatever that is. We see this Aurora politician is just getting by. Holding on to her part time job, as a city council member IS the increased pay benefit and the main reason, she draws that salary of over a 100K. She just hasn’t figured that out yet. She might want to run for another term there is more value in the bigger picture.