Charlie Richardson, a former Aurora city attorney and councilmember with over four decades of public service under his belt, filed a lawsuit on August 5 in Arapahoe County District Court, asking to rewrite the way Coffman's strong-mayor proposal will be presented to voters on the November 7 Aurora general election ballot.
Richardson says he's worried about what looks to be a deceptive power grab by the mayor, who's running for reelection this year. A strong-mayor system would give Coffman a laundry list of political abilities not detailed on the ballot, according to the lawsuit, while also taking a "substantial" amount of power from Aurora City Council.
Richardson says he's worried about what looks to be a deceptive power grab by the mayor, who's running for reelection this year. A strong-mayor system would give Coffman a laundry list of political abilities not detailed on the ballot, according to the lawsuit, while also taking a "substantial" amount of power from Aurora City Council.
"We don't want any mayor to have this much authority and to exclude the influence of the elected city council members," Richardson says. "Our concern goes beyond this current mayor to any future mayor."
Coffman's proposal would ditch the city manager position — currently occupied by an interim, Jason Batchelor — in favor of giving the mayor the power of appointing and managing the city administration, according to the Aurora strong mayor proposal.
Richardson — who, ironically, was an interim Aurora city manager from 1996 to 1997 — is the lone plaintiff in the lawsuit, though it lists several attorneys for Richardson, including election expert Mark Grueskin. The defendants are the City of Aurora and three Aurora residents whose signatures on the original petition kicked off the formal process to put the strong-mayor question on the ballot.
"I was alarmed because of my experience with the City of Aurora," Richardson says. "So I started to reach out to other people in the community, they started reaching out to me...we have taken up the cause."
The lawsuit charges that three people behind the petition — Elizabeth Hamilton, Paul Mitchell and Garrett Walls — lied to and misled voters who signed it, and claims the ballot measure is now illegally proposing multiple changes to the Aurora City Charter, which is the main governing document of the city.
The strong-mayor proposal is headed to the ballot as a question of whether to adopt a mayor-council system — or strong mayor — and whether to limit the maximum number of terms someone can serve on city council from three to two. It would also increase the mayor's salary and limit some of the control that city council members have over the city's budget, in addition to giving the mayor more power, the lawsuit accuses. 
The effort to put the strong-mayor proposal on the ballot started with the Term Limits and Empowering the Mayor for a Better Aurora campaign. Opponents have harged that the name of the group was intended to mislead voters about its real intention of strengthening the mayor. The petition was found to have enough signatures on July 25, but people can still protest it until August 14; after that, it will officially be on the ballot.
Richardson remembers that when he began to consider getting involved in the lawsuit, he heard that the proposal was being suggested as a way to turn Aurora's city government into what Colorado Springs has: a strong-mayor system put in place over ten years ago.
Aurora lawyer and former city councilman Charlie Richardson is suing to make sure voters know the details of an upcoming ballot measure.
LinkedIn
The effort to put the strong-mayor proposal on the ballot started with the Term Limits and Empowering the Mayor for a Better Aurora campaign. Opponents have harged that the name of the group was intended to mislead voters about its real intention of strengthening the mayor. The petition was found to have enough signatures on July 25, but people can still protest it until August 14; after that, it will officially be on the ballot.
Richardson remembers that when he began to consider getting involved in the lawsuit, he heard that the proposal was being suggested as a way to turn Aurora's city government into what Colorado Springs has: a strong-mayor system put in place over ten years ago.
"That rumor was an effort to tamp down the concern," Richardson says. "The Coffman proposal goes way beyond Colorado Springs. It both increases the power of the mayor beyond Colorado Springs and at the same time decreases the power of the [Aurora] City Council."
Richardson blasts the proposal as a "classic example of a big, big" violation of the single subject rule — a Colorado law banning ballot measures that propose multiple, unrelated questions.
"The single subject, I believe, is very applicable to this proposal," Richardson says. "Let's say you're in favor of a strong mayor, but you've found it to be effective [for a mayor] to work with council members. How do you end up voting for this measure?"
As written, Richardson charges, the proposal would require Aurora voters to accept a weaker city council and a stronger mayor simultaneously, despite state laws requiring changes such as these to be posed as two separate questions on the ballot,
With the lawsuit, he is demanding that the court step in to give the ballot proposal an accurate name that clarifies how it aims to add powers to the mayor's office. He also wants the court to determine that the proposal violates state law and city code by trying to change unrelated policies.
"The summary and ballot title need to be modified to more accurately reflect all of the changes that are being proposed," Richardson says.
Coffman had denied his involvement in the strong-mayor campaign until after the Aurora City Clerk's office determined that the petition had enough signatures on July 25. Richardson's lawsuit doesn't mention him.
However, public records published on August 7, two days after the suit was filed, revealed that Coffman has already donated $10,000 toward the Term Limits campaign. Another $144,000 went to the campaign from a group called Colorado Dawn, which had funded Republican and nonpartisan conservative candidates for the Colorado Springs City Council race in 2021.
Aurora Fire Fighters Local 129 was the first group to urge Richardson to look at Coffman's strong-mayor proposal, he says, and it's supporting his efforts. That union and the Aurora Police Association have both come out in opposition to the strong-mayor proposal, which would give the mayor a heavier hand in how both the Aurora Police Department and Aurora Fire Rescue are run, more control over their budget, and the power to pick who runs both departments.
Richardson also expects to file a protest with the city clerk by August 14 that will challenge the validity and status of the signatures on the petition. "We're on a two-pronged attack because the people who support this effort legitimately believe this would be a disaster to give one person this much power," Richardson says.
Voters who want their signatures taken off the ballot have until 5 p.m. August 14 to submit a written protest to the city clerk's office via email to [email protected]; they can also be delivered or mailed to the City Clerk's Office, 15151 East Alameda Parkway in Aurora.
