Photo by Philip B. Poston/Sentinel Colorado
Aurora Ballot Questions 3A, 3B and 3C
AURORA | For the first time since 1993, the city is asking voters to increase the sales tax and approve three ballot proposals to fund $264 million in transportation, public safety and city facility capital improvement projects.
If voters approve all three bonds questions, it would amount to a 0.325% sales tax increase, or three cents for every $10 purchase. The questions will be listed on the ballot as measures 3A, 3B and 3C.
The proposals would fund 65 projects across three city areas, including transportation, public safety and city facilities, which includes parks, recreation centers and libraries. Some of the major projects include the replacement of the Peoria Street bridge, construction of a new fire station, library and recreation center, improvements to police and fire facilities and park renovations.
The city council unanimously approved the ballot questions, with council members citing the city’s infrastructure needs. In an interview with the Sentinel, Mayor Mike Coffman said the bonds are a financially responsible way for the city to maintain roads, libraries, recreation facilities and more.
“It’s really about the future of Aurora,” Coffman said. “(The bonds will) update our city’s infrastructure and improve public safety … I think it’s very responsible to borrow for capital improvement needs.”
Councilmember Alison Coombs echoed the mayor.
“We have a lot of buildings, we have a lot of roads, and we have to take care of them, just like we expect private citizens to take care of their property and we expect private businesses to take care of their property,” Coombs said.
Coombs said many of the projects reflect community values, including improving parks, recreation facilities, libraries and roads.
“I do think it’s also really important that we make sure that folks in all parts of our city, including the newer and growing parts of our city, have access to the kinds of amenities that people throughout the city enjoy, including recreation centers and libraries,” Coombs said.
One bond question asks for a 0.13% sales tax increase, or 1.3 cents on every $10, to fund $107.4 million in transportation projects, such as the construction of Gun Club Road and transportation improvements for the Aurora Reservoir.
Another bond question proposes a 0.13% sales tax increase to fund nearly $105 million in facilities projects, like building a new library and recreation center in northeast Aurora and the renovation of the Aurora Center for Active Adults.
The third bond question asks for a 0.06% sales tax increase, or 0.6 cents per $10, for $52 million of public safety improvements, including upgrades to several fire stations, police facilities and the 911 call center, as well as building a new fire station.
The projects were identified over a three-year process through the Build Up Aurora Infrastructure Task Force, which identified over $2 billion in infrastructure needs across the city. Through community engagement efforts and determining which projects are development ready, the task force narrowed the projects down to the ones included in the bonds.
Deputy City Manager Laura Perry previously told the council that the total of all the infrastructure needs in the bond questions and identified by Build Up Aurora “exceed what the city can afford to do within its annual budget,” which is why the city is turning to voters for bond funding.
Coffman said he understands that affordability is top of mind for many voters, but hopes residents can see the value of the bond measures.
“As you look at all three ballot measures combined, it’s about a third of a penny on a $10 purchase, so I think it’s pretty reasonable,” Coffman said. “Aurora and its city government have been very fiscally responsible over the years, and we would never go to the voters unless there was an incredible need that otherwise could not be met. And I think that it’s very important for us, from an economic development standpoint, to maintain our infrastructure.”
Opponents to the proposed bond say the increase would negatively impact consumers and that the city isn’t doing enough to bolster its retail tax base by attracting new businesses and supporting existing ones.
Some community members have also expressed concerns that the bonds include funding for police infrastructure and questioned how the city would track its spending.
Should the questions pass, city council approved the creation of a bond oversight committee to ensure that funding is spent in a transparent and accountable manner. The city is also legally obligated to use the funding on the projects identified in the ballot measures.
All of the proposed sales tax increases would sunset after 30 years, which is the life of the bond issues, unless voters approve extensions in the future.
If all of the bond measures are approved, Aurora’s total sales tax rate would be 8.825% in Arapahoe County and 8.325% in Adams County, up from 8.5% and 8% respectively. The city’s sales tax rate would still be behind Broomfield, Castle Rock, Commerce City, Denver and Fort Collins if the bond questions pass.
Aurora questions 3D would change city election cycle
Voters will decide this November whether to move Aurora municipal elections to even-numbered years to align with federal elections, which has been shown to increase voter turnout.
In June, city council approved a measure sponsored by Councilmember Alli Jackson to ask voters to move city council elections from odd-numbered years to even-numbered years. Opposing council members were Stephanie Hancock and Angela Lawson, while council members Françoise Bergan and Curtis Gardner were absent.
A majority of the council supported the switch, citing higher voter participation, while noting voters will get the ultimate decision.
Hancock and Mayor Mike Coffman said they opposed aligning the municipal ballot with even-years because they worried about voter fatigue leading people to skip questions on long ballots. They also raised concerns about local nonpartisan races being tainted by national politics and the potential impacts to campaigns, like increasing costs and more competition for fundraising.
“When we have these elections all lumped together like this, I believe that the local elections tend to get lost in the sauce,” Hancock said. “They’ll just start at the top of the ballot and just check all the way down or they’ll just vote for the national candidates or (Congressional candidates) or whoever it is and forget the rest of them. I think it’s great that we have our own elections.”
Jackson and Councilmember Alison Coombs responded that even with some participation drop-off on long ballots, switching to even-years would still ultimately mean more people voting. Coombs pushed back on the voter fatigue argument, saying voters are also fatigued by having elections every year.
“I think it creates a more stable and reliable campaign season that reduces fatigue for everyone who’s actively involved in the process and that’s one of the reasons why I support this question,” Coombs said. “Better turnout is good.”
Lawson said she wasn’t necessarily opposed to switching elections to even years, but opposed putting the question on the ballot this year because the city is also asking voters to approve a sales tax increase. She said she didn’t want those ballot questions to be overshadowed.
Jackson told the Sentinel that she introduced the ordinance with the hope of improving participation in elections and reducing barriers to voting.
“It’s kind of a numbers game and looking at what will help voters be able to engage in the political process in a more fair and effective way,” Jackson said.
Data from Citizens Union, a nonpartisan civic watchdog group based in New York, found that several cities saw huge increases in voter participation for mayoral races after switching to even-year elections. In El Paso, the voter turnout for the mayoral race in 2017 was 8%, while in 2024 it was 35%. San Francisco saw its mayoral election turnout go from 36% in 2019 to 76% in 2024.
In Colorado, Boulder residents approved switching to even-year elections in 2022. Castle Rock and Parker also have municipal elections on even years.
The switch could also impact the cost of elections, which are more expensive in even-numbered years because more people are participating and the ballots are often longer. In 2024, the city paid more than $121,000 to place one measure on the ballot, while it paid almost $72,000 for five ballot measures and five council seats on the 2025 ballot.
About 151,400 votes were cast on a citywide ballot measure in 2024, while in 2025, the five citywide measures received between about 76,400 votes and 78,900 votes.
However, Jackson said looking at the cost of election per voter shows it’s more cost-effective to have elections in even-numbered years, adding that some money would be saved by not having to pay for elections every year.
If voters approve the change, it would go into effect for the 2030 election. To facilitate the transitions, any council members and the mayor elected in 2027 and 2029 would have three-year terms. Council members and the mayor otherwise serve four-year terms.
None of the sitting council members’ current terms would be impacted, but if they were reelected in 2027 or 2029, they would have a shorter term than usual.
Jackson said she campaigned on aligning elections with even-numbered years and served on a city committee to examine the switch prior to being elected to council, so she feels there is voter support for the measure.
“This even-year election measure is really about making a stronger democracy for our local elections,” she said.