AURORA | When it comes to the city’s residency requirement for the city manager, some residents and staff are questioning whether renting an apartment while owning a house outside of the city is enough to claim Aurora as home.
Similar to residency requirements for elected officials, Aurora requires its city manager to reside within the city before taking the oath of office. Last year, voters overwhelmingly reaffirmed the residency requirement, rejecting a ballot measure to remove it by 82%.
City Manager Jason Batchelor, who was appointed by city council to the position in December 2023, rents a 1-bedroom apartment in Aurora and also owns a house outside of the city, property and other records show.
While the city attorney says the charter residency mandate is being adhered to, residents and city staff who spoke to the Sentinel said it’s a loophole being exploited, especially in light of a recent election.
Jeff McFarland, a resident of Aurora, said he thinks the city is operating in bad faith.
“If your answer includes, ‘Well, technically,’ then whatever perceived moral high ground you had in the situation disappears,” McFarland said.
Since the city manager is entrusted to oversee many of the city’s operations, McFarland said it’s fair to ask that person to have “an actual vetted interest in the community, save for their salary.”
“The reason I think it’s important for someone who lives in Aurora to be the one managing Aurora is because I don’t believe that otherwise you can be as ingrained in your community as you need to be,” he said.
A current veteran employee of the police department, who spoke to the Sentinel on the condition of anonymity, fearing retribution for his comments, called Batchelor’s living situation “the worst-kept secret at city hall.”
He said it’s hypocritical of the city to not apply clear standards for Batchelor when other employees are expected to comply with their own job requirements. Only the city manager is required to live inside city limits as a condition of employment, according to the city charter.
“It sends a really poor message to city employees that we all must abide by the rules and not just find a way around them, unless we’re at the top of the payroll.”
Voter registration records show Batchelor has been registered at an Aurora apartment since April 2024, three months after being appointed city manager. However, property records show that Batchelor also has owned a home outside of the city since 2009, where he was previously registered to vote. The Sentinel is limiting information about Batchelor’s addresses in the interest of safety concerns.
In a response to questions from the Sentinel, a statement from city spokesperson Ryan Luby said Batchelor “maintains a residence in Aurora” and he is registered to vote in the city. The city didn’t elaborate on whether the Aurora residence is Batchelor’s “primary” residence, as required by state voting laws.
At a June 23, 2025 city council meeting, City Attorney Pete Schulte said litigation in Denver prompted last year’s ballot measure requesting the removal of the residency requirement, not a request from Batchelor or the city manager’s office. He said at the time that Batchelor met the city’s standard for the residency requirement.
Aurora’s charter doesn’t define residency or provide a way to determine primary residence.
The charter states: “At the time of appointment, the city manager need not be a resident of the city or state, but prior to taking the oath of office, the city manager shall reside within the city.”
Under state law, the primary residence is defined as a “home or place in which a person’s habitation is fixed and to which that person, whenever absent, has the present intention of returning after a departure or absence, regardless of the duration of the absence.”
The law also says a number of factors can be considered when determining someone’s primary residence for voter registration. They include employment, motor vehicle registration, the residence listed for tax purposes, marital status, residence of parents, spouse and children, leaseholds, location of personal property, existence of any other residences and the amount of time spent at each residence.
William Mast, elections division director at the Arapahoe County Clerk’s Office, said in cases where voters have more than one property, the voter decides which is their primary address. He added that voters can only vote at one address.
“For state and local elections, residency is defined by that intent to return, or where they feel home is,” Mast said. “It’s where they tend to remain indefinitely.
According to Colorado Secretary of State voting rules, “You cannot have two residences.”
City officials insist Batchelor’s apartment meets the city’s requirement.
“City Manager Batchelor is in compliance with the city charter,” according to the city statement.
Mayor Mike Coffman told the Sentinel that he knows of Batchelor’s other property but agrees that he meets the residency requirement.
“Yes, I believe he is in compliance with the city charter,” Coffman said in an email. “The Mayor and City Council as a body ultimately determine who is most qualified to serve such an important role in our city.”
Another member of the council, Mayor Pro Tem Alison Coombs, said she believes Batchelor’s “renting of a home in Aurora is consistent with the charter.”
“Among those two properties, where Jason spends most of his time, I don’t know,” Coombs said. “I see him in the city of Aurora, and at City of Aurora events and activities that he’s requested at, almost more than council.”
Coombs said Batchelor is dedicated to the city and she is happy with his job performance.
“If there’s concern from folks, I’m happy to hear that concern directly, but my understanding is the arrangement Jason has is above board and consistent with expectations,” she said. “Jason takes his work very seriously and consistently demonstrates that he cares about the interests of the city and the people that live here.”
When reached by phone on May 29, Councilmember Rob Andrews said he had no comment. The remaining council members did not respond to an email and phone call seeking comment.
Batchelor, 51, has worked for the city for the past 17 years, beginning as budget manager, then finance manager and deputy city manager. He graduated from the United States Military Academy in West Point in 1996. After a five-year stint in the Army, he received master’s degrees in engineering and public affairs from the University of Texas at Austin.
As city manager, Batchelor’s salary in 2025 was $358,644.
Aurora resident Hashim Coates said it’s an ethical issue if Batchelor’s primary residence is outside of the city because he feels voters expected more than technical compliance with the city’s charter.
“The city doesn’t provide the same grace on technicality when it comes to fines, business licensing or things like that, so I think the residents deserve more,” Coates said.
Coates said he supports the residency requirement for top city staff for the same reason that elected officials are required to live in their districts: accountability. He added that he favors expanding the residency requirement to other top city positions, like the police and fire chiefs.
“I believe public service is strongest when it’s rooted in community,” Coates said. “When the city manager, police officers, fire chief or team executives live in Aurora, they experience the same roads and neighborhoods, the same public services and the same challenges as every other resident. It creates a level of accountability and perspective that cannot be replicated from outside the city limits.”
Another current and long-time city employee, who also spoke to the Sentinel on the condition of anonymity because of fear over retribution, said the council is allowing “the opposite of what voters clearly said they wanted just last year.”
“This is a classic case of ‘Rules for thee but not me,’” he said.
He needs to fire Chamberlain and replace the entire police department. Who cares where he lives?
I would have voted for the amendment if it expanded the residence boundaries to a reasonable radius of the city limits. Living in Watkins or Commerce City is fine. Managing over Zoom from Phoenix is not. That badly-written amendment treated those situations as equally valid. No wonder it got voted down – it was written to fail.
Mr Batchelor has cast his professional lot with the City of Aurora for nearly two decades, His livelihood and his profesional reputation is completely tied to the City. If the City faqils, he fails, adn so too his re;putation and therefore his ability to find work elsewhere. Owning a home in the City is not going to make him more tied to the City’s success tahn he is currently. Selling his home elsewhere and only having a residence in the City is not going to make him more invested in the City. Is he taking advantage of a loophole, certainly. does so doing cost him thousands of dollars a year in rent he really ahs little or no use in paying other than maintaining the loophole, very likely. The thing is, he does it so good for him. He is following the letter of the law if not its spirit, but in folowing the letter of the law he does all which is morally required. Now as to his salary….
Is anyone else noticing that the Sentinel’s “voices of the community” always seem to come from the same small political clubhouse?
In this story on the city manager’s residency, the paper leans on Jeff McFarland and Hashim Coates as if they’re neutral referees on ethics. There’s no mention that one is known for profanity-laced tirades at council meetings, and the other is a Democratic activist who admitted to a prostitution incident and fired a gun in a mall parking lot before pleading guilty to a weapons charge. That’s important context when you present them as Aurora’s moral compass.
On the actual issue, I agree the city manager should live in or very near the city. Voters just reaffirmed the residency requirement, and that expectation is reasonable. But Jason Batchelor currently rents an apartment in Aurora while his family remains in their longtime home just outside the city, where his children attend school. Forcing a move five miles purely for optics would mean tens of thousands in unnecessary costs and disruption for his family, unless taxpayers are willing to pay for it.
If residents want to tighten the definition of “reside” for the city manager going forward, that’s a policy debate for council and voters. Turning a good-faith legal gray area into a political hit, using the same handful of activists as the voice of “the community,” does nothing to help Aurora.
I agree with you, Jason is abiding by the rules and is keeping his family’s interests in mind. He works hard and is well intentioned for the city and has done more for the long-term success of Aurora than so many others.
Who cares where the city manager lives or sleeps most nights? Is Aurora monitoring where the city council lays their heads? Who lives in their parents’ basement? The leftist activist, Jeff McFarland, seems to think only residents should guide the city, while his vocal comrades in DACAC live in Denver or farther.
> Who cares where the city manager lives or sleeps most nights?
81% of the voters in Aurora.
Odd that the location of the primary residence isn’t mentioned at all.
Is the other home with the family just outside of the city’s boundaries? He’s here in town, it’s not like he’s doing his job from thousands of miles away. He drives our roads and cares about our city. If he has kids going to school and other family ties that should be taken in to consideration, and he has a residence in the city’s limits.
I’m more concerned as to why the chairperson for the city’s “Public Safety Committee” gets a DUI that is *THREE TIMES OVER THE LIMIT* and then gets off with a soft sentence. Lets investigate THAT story rather than clutch our pearls over someone following the rules the way some people want them to.
No surprise that The Sentinel would turn to the vile Hashim Coates and Jeff McFarland for opinions on legal clarity. the Sentinel continues to decline in journalistic value by the day. On the issue of residence, Batchelor has an apartment in Aurora. He is compliant and a fine city manager. End of discussion.
Residency requirements for city managers are bad policy.
A city manager is not an elected representative. A manager is an appointed professional executive who serves at the pleasure of the elected body. If the manager is ineffective, unethical, unavailable, or not aligned with council direction, the council can remove that person. That is direct accountability.
The standard should be performance, proximity, and response time. Can the manager get to City Hall quickly? Can they respond during an emergency? Are they present at meetings, visible in the organization, available to the public, and accountable to the elected body? Those things matter. Sleeping inside an arbitrary municipal boundary does not.
Residency requirements also shrink the candidate pool. They require a professional employee to uproot housing, schools, family routines, spouse employment, finances, and privacy for a job that may have very little security. City managers are public servants. They are not property of the city.
The “buy in” argument is weak. Living inside city limits does not automatically create commitment, judgment, ethics, competence, or community understanding. Plenty of people live in a place and are disengaged from it. Plenty of professional managers live nearby and are deeply invested because their career, reputation, and daily work are tied to the success of the community.
The public deserves a competent, ethical, responsive manager. That is not the same thing as requiring the manager to live on a particular side of a city-limit line.
Proud city staff member here. Aside from the forever-critics of everything in their jobs, I’d venture to say the remaining 97% of city staff stand by Jason’s leadership. He’s steered Aurora through some of its toughest years on actual crises and manufactured crises like this story. He’s retained some of the best government employees in the metro area in numerous city departments. Yeah he could probably improve in some areas but to many of us he’s the best big boss we’ve ever had. The community is better for it. For this story to suggest Jason doesn’t care about Aurora and community and staff is downright inflammatory.
Coates and Macfarland are probably angling for the job themselves, or working to get him ousted in favor of one of their activist buddies, by trying to manufacture dissent. It’s why they’re suddenly appealing to rules they don’t actually believe in.
LOL Another Dave Perry “hit piece” that wasn’t. Dave, you couldn’t get any actually respected “activists” to comment for your story? Of course not! Because no one cares about this other than you. But keep giving “time” to the likes of McFarland and Coates and see your readership drop even more.
Voters were asked to carve out an exception for Batchelor and they voted against it. His residence is where he lives. If he lives in the rented apartment, that’s his residence. If he lives with his family in a house across the border, that’s his residence. He expects others to follow the laws of the City of Aurora (no matter how inconvenient those laws may be) and he should hold himself to the same standard. He may be the greatest city manager ever, but if he’s not actually living in his apartment, he’s nothing more than a scofflaw and hypocrite. Sad fact that neither the Mayor nor the Mayor Pro Tem respect the rule of law.
I wonder where Jason has laid his head down the last few nights.