AURORA | Ending Aurora’s occupational privilege tax, or so-called “head tax,” was made final in 2025, and the new progressive city council cannot repeal it now, according to city legal officials.
Last year, one of the most contentious issues among Aurora City Council members was former Councilmember Danielle Jurinsky’s proposal to eliminate the citywide “head tax.”
The tax required employees and their employers to each pay $2 per month per employee. The tax was initially intended more than 20 years ago to help fund city services for workers who might not contribute through other taxes. It was estimated to generate $5.9 million annually in 2025.
This tax was something Jurinsky was passionate about repealing as a local business owner, but it caused a disagreement among her and other council members when Aurora Fire and Rescue staff reported to city council that they needed two new fire stations in East Aurora.
Councilmember Françoise Bergan last year suggested backing away from the repeal to help fund the needed fire stations. Much of the city council showed interest in upending Jurinsky’s repeal proposal, until she became outraged at the plan. Former Councilmember Dustin Zvonek even suggested a hold on the repeal until June 2025, rather than Jan. 1, 2025, as initially planned.
The drama went public when the Sentinel published profane texts among Republican city lawmakers after Jurinsky learned about a plan to stall the head-tax cessation.
She ultimately persuaded the majority of council to enact the repeal and end the city’s head tax, just as the city council learned the city’s budget would have a large deficit in 2026.
The budget shortfall has been a continued issue that the newly elected, more progressive council members voiced concern about, and Councilmembers Alison Coombs and Amy Wiles had previously mentioned interest in reversing the repeal.
City Attorney Pete Schulte told the Sentinel that “repealing the tax repeal” is no longer possible, because it was already implemented Jan. 1, 2025. Since the repeal has already gone into effect and the “head tax” was created before the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, known as TABOR, reinstating it would now have to go to voters for approval.
Schulte said that, at the time, all city council members were informed of the different ways to end the head tax, including just a pause, and Jurinsky was adamant about choosing the most permanent option.
.
Maybe the new City council will place the matter on the next ballot. They could call it a Jurinsky Tax. They could double the amount from $2 to $4 as the rate had not been increased in years to keep up with inflation. Given how unpopular Jurinsky became with her behavior naming the tax after her to help erase or redefine her legacy would be interesting, petty, but interesting, and after all, pettiness seems likely to be her legacy.
Can we all agree to stop bashing elected leaders with whom might disagree– especially as we hide like our identities like sniveling cowards? A plurality of 49% honestly love our extended families regardless of their politics. You’re standing in a circular firing squad when you criticize either side of our families.
I publicly supported Jurinsky as well as Gomes and Wiles because these three were the only ones to acknowledge the retail/dining economy is in the toilet and that the city should pursue a change so our cultural tax dollars can be invested in revitalizing Aurora instead of having over the 90% money collected in Aurora go to feed Denver’s cultural gluttony.
There’s $40 to 50 million dollars per year in additional tax revenue not being collected because the city would never form and execute a serious retail/dining/entertainment strategy. Danielle Jurinsky fully understood this and was ready to pursue an exit from the Denver SCFD but unfortunately her ultra-conservative colleagues kept their heads in the sand.
Its my hope that CM Wiles can accomplish what Jurinsky couldn’t. Are you going to oppose Wiles just because Jurinsky favored the solution?