Strong-mayor proposal clears first hurdle on path to Aurora ballot; Coffman acknowledges involvement

AURORA | Aurora’s city clerk ruled Tuesday that a petition to empower the mayor and restructure the city’s government had gathered enough signatures to move forward in the process of appearing before voters this fall.

Petition sponsors gathered 12,198 valid signatures out of a total of 20,409 signatures submitted to the clerk’s office, according to a city news release, 181 signatures above the required threshold.

For a citizen-sponsored charter amendment to appear on a regular election ballot, Aurora requires the sponsors to gather the number of signatures equal to at least 5% of the electorate registered to vote on the date of the last regular municipal election — in this case, 12,017 signatures.

The last of the signatures was submitted June 26, and the clerk’s office had up to 30 days to vet them and determine whether they belonged to registered voters.

Most of the language of the amendment pertains to eliminating the position of city manager and folding that person’s authority over city staffers into the position of mayor, who would also be able to veto City Council legislation.

Other parts of the proposal would add an at-large council member and reduce term limits for mayors and council members from three four-year terms to two, among other changes.

While supporters of so-called “strong-mayor” governments generally argue that folding the responsibilities of a city manager and mayor into a single position encourages leaner, more efficient city governments, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has been vocal in its opposition to the proposal, describing it as a power grab by Mayor Mike Coffman.

Opponents have also accused canvassers hired by Victor’s Canvassing of Colorado Springs of misleading members of the public into signing the petition, presenting it as modifying term limits while downplaying the new powers that would be given to the mayor.

“Citizens in Aurora, local business leaders and elected officials from both sides of the aisle are ready to fight Coffman’s power grab at every step, including by challenging the petition process which, we are strongly convinced, did not submit enough legal signatures,” said Charlie Richardson, a former city official representing an advocacy group opposed to the amendment.

“Many signers were misled to believe this was a term limits measure for city council, when in truth all the other language is an elaborate misdirection so that Mike Coffman can populate city government with some of the political friends he has accumulated over his 40 years in politics.”

Sponsors of the proposal have for the most part remained silent, ignoring and refusing to answer questions. Tyler Sandberg, who presented himself as a spokesperson for the group behind the proposal earlier this year, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Coffman broke his silence on the proposal Tuesday, saying in a statement that he supported it, while describing it first of all as a term-limit item.

“I believe, prospectively, that the residents of Aurora would be better served by reducing the term limits for our city’s elected officials to eight years instead of twelve,” he said.

“I also believe that the city of Aurora has dramatically changed, and it’s time for our structure of government to change with it. Aurora is no longer a sleepy suburb but it’s now the 51st largest city in the United States with the urban challenges of race, poverty and crime that are better suited for a mayor/council form of government where the mayor, who is directly accountable to the people, is responsible for the operations of the government to include everything from the conduct of our police officers to providing the leadership necessary to achieve an aspirational vision for our city.”

Two individuals named as petition representatives in filings with the city clerk’s office have told the news media that Coffman initially approached them about getting involved in the campaign, and numerous other signs point to Coffman playing a leading role in the proposal.

When asked what his involvement has been in the campaign, Coffman replied Wednesday that he had “been involved from the start, and I will continue to be involved.”

“I first became involved in discussing the issue with community leaders in Aurora, Denver and Colorado Springs,” he said in a statement. “I’ve contributed financially, and that will be on the upcoming finance report that is due on August 5th. Mostly involved in talking to community leaders and helping to develop a campaign plan.”

Voters who believe their signatures were solicited improperly have until 5 p.m. Aug. 14 to submit a written protest to the clerk’s office.

A copy of any protest will be sent to the petition representatives, and a hearing will be scheduled between 10 and 20 days after the protest is mailed. Hearings will be open to the public, and the clerk will make her decision no later than 10 days after the end of the hearing, according to city clerk officials.

The city said in its press release that the “burden of proof is on the protestants to prove that the petition is insufficient.”

A protest form is available at auroragov.org/2023Elections and can be emailed to Aurora.Elections@auroragov.org or else mailed physically or dropped off in person at the City Clerk’s Office, 1st Floor, 15151 E. Alameda Parkway, Aurora, CO, 80012.

City spokesman Ryan Luby said the date when the clerk’s office makes its final determination of sufficiency would depend on the outcome of protests and any litigation that could arise from the process.