AURORA | Aurora voters will almost certainly decide this fall whether to allow banished pit bulls back into the city, approve a tax extension for transportation projects, and whether to allow police captains and lieutenants to form a union.
Council members gave initial approval Monday night to move forward with all of the ballot measures at a study session. Council has until Aug. 25 to formally adopt other potential measures to put on the November ballot.
A transportation measure, proposed by Councilman Bob LeGare would ask for a $4.9 million tax extension for the next 15 years to fund nearly $500 million in transportation and infrastructure projects that have been needed since 2012, when a similar measure was rejected by voters. Extending that tax would be mean voters who own a $200,000 home would continue to pay $27 a year in property taxes.
In his proposal, LeGare said the projects would be determined by public meetings and citizen surveys. The city’s Infrastructure and Operations Policy committee would review the projects and present those findings to the council by fall.
This time the money would also be set aside in a restricted fund for transportation projects that would annually change.
Council will also ask voters to say yes to an additional tax increase of $5.9 million per year to address what city staff and council see as growing public safety needs. The money would go to police, fire, municipal court, and the detention center, according to city staff.
That tax increase would mean voters who own a $200,000 home would pay $32 a year in property taxes.
Council also agreed to move forward with a ballot question that would create a new collective bargaining unit for police lieutenants and captains. According to city documents, the measure is necessary because the interests of those in the rank of lieutenant or captain are frequently not represented due to the comparatively larger size of the group in the rank of sergeant and below.
The most controversial measure that could go on the ballot this November will ask voters if they want to lift the city’s nearly decade-long ban on pit bulls.
The banned breeds include pit bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers and Staffordshire bull terriers — all considered pit bulls. The three breeds are still allowed as service dogs.
At a study session May 19, council members gave the initial OK to move forward with a ballot question that would ask voters to approve a special sales tax for retail marijuana that would generate $5.2 million a year for the city.
No – to all! Bonuses are still being given high up staff and employees raises still aren’t near the cost of living increase!
Quiet promotions and raises of 10% a year for the big executive lackies and pals who do everything they are told and can get away with taxpayers paying for valet parking
YES! It’s about time to reconsider the pit bull ban! Too many sweet dogs being put to sleep/families having to move to keep their family pets. Punish the deed not the breed. Promote responsible dog ownership!
Moron.
I will vote no on all. I refuse to vote for a tax increase for any reason as long as money is wasted on illegals. I will also vote to keep pits out. Not so much for the dog but for the owners. Pretty much every pit owner I have known or meet is trash. Have a great day!
Pretty much everyone I know that bases their votes or actions on stereotypes of others based on fears or the actions of a few is a bigot. I would rather be trash than a bigot. Good thing I have avoided becoming either. Have a great day as well!
Good luck with tax increases! Add taxes for marijuana, that should take care of the problems. And start taking better care of our tax dollars. We are all sick and tired of tax increases. It seems homeowners take a big hit, why should we pay for everything?
Voting on something is only as good as the person who is voting on said subject. If someone thinks, like in the comment below, that all pit bull owners are trash, then voting on that subject does damage because it isn’t the reality of dogs and who owns them. A person actually has to have an open mind, be willing to meet these type dogs and their owners and realize all dogs are owned by all types of people. All dogs are individuals, as are people. Good luck voting on this subject but unfortunately many people vote on things they know nothing about or care about. You have to care first to get informed about a subject. Bans have been repealed in other cities because people were willing to learn more about the reality of dogs and managing dogs and the fact that people are guessing at breeds of dogs all the time and calling every block headed dog a pit bull which, has been shown too many times to be wrong. Good luck. If at first you don’t succeed, try, try, try, and try again to educate people on dogs.
So, city council will be looking at the ballot box to raise a few million bucks in Aurora for safety issues, and top cop salaries. Good, earn the money the old fashion way….. Augment taxes without
public detection. It’s simple, the mayor needs is have his servile city council approve a contract revision in order that Xerox aka Affiliated Computer Services (ACS) to install more Red-Light-Photo-cameras. Xerox/ACS only holds back about 20% dealer handling fee per paid ticket, the city gets the rest. Now there’s one slick money-making safety
producing gimmick. The APD Chief’s claims it’s all for safety and not revenue. The primary significance of this article is Aurora demonstrates its ability never stopping at trying to figure out ways how to make the citizenry pay for nonsense, when they do, they pay some more. Why bother the voters, about meaningful safety?
Punish the owners not the dogs. I love pitbull and the often work as therapy dogs. BSLs are not effective as Denver dog bite statistics show.
Oh yes the “service dog” claim.
Nice try.
I guess until you’ve seen some little kid get their face bit off by a dog you will live in denial.
As will you live in fear, until you see an autistic child open up around the unconditional love of a therapy dog who happens to be a “pit bull.” There are thousands and thousands of “pit bull” success stories for every single tragedy. Irrational fears based on media hype and preconceived stereotypes have sadly closed your eyes to reality.
Yes, it is time to repeal the ban in favor of an all-around dangerous dog law. Pit bull is not a breed, it is a group of dogs with similar characteristics, and physical features do not indicate whether or not a dog is a danger. It depends on the individual dog. This ban does nothing to prevent attacks from dogs that do not have those physical features, and it is past time to start protecting the public from ALL dangerous dogs, regardless of what they look like, rather than just banning the ‘scary looking’ dogs, that may be harmless.