Funding for the ballot proposal that seeks to change Aurora’s form of government to a “strong mayor” system has reached roughly $150,000, while the opposition has yet to report raising any money. 

Contributions mainly came from Aurora Mayor Mike Coffman and Colorado Dawn, a group that has spent more than $2 million since 2022 on Republican causes and candidates in the past year. 

Coffman gave $10,000 to the effort and Colorado Dawn contributed $144,100.

In nonprofit filings, Colorado Dawn, which is based in Colorado Springs, describes itself as an organization that seeks to educate the public about western values and economics.

Aurora city councilmember Curtis Gardner said efforts are underway to raise money to oppose the ballot measure. Gardner said former city councilmember Charlie Richardson is leading that effort.

Early this week, Richardson filed a lawsuit against the city and three Aurora residents who signed paperwork initiating the proposal. The lawsuit alleged that the ballot initiative uses misleading language and does not adhere to single-subject requirements. 

No financial information for the “no” campaign has been posted on Aurora’s campaign finance database as of Friday afternoon.

Colorado Dawn, which first began spending political money in late 2022, has spent more than $2 million on campaigns and candidates, including giving to the Constitutional Conservatives of El Paso County; the Senate Majority Fund, which is dedicated to regaining the Republican majority in the Colorado Senate; and, Recall Priola, which sought to recall Sen. Kevin Priola, D-Henderson, after the senator switching party affiliations to Democrat. 

The amendment seeks to amend the Aurora city charter and create a council-mayor, or “strong mayor” form of government. 

Under this system, the city manager position is eliminated, and the mayor becomes the executive in charge of running the city. “Strong mayors” typically prepare the budget, hold veto powers and appoint key department heads, among other duties. Denver and Colorado Springs have a “strong mayor” system. 

Foes say the strong mayor system would vest far too much power in one person and accuse the Term Limits for a Better Aurora group of misleading voters into signing their petitions by presenting the campaign as a way to set term limits, rather than as a change the city’s governance structure.

Proponents maintain that the city has grown to a size in which the mayor should be held accountable to voters through an election, and that a “strong mayor” system will curb bureaucracy in city hall. They also insist that the measure’s “full language” is on the petitions and signature gatherers have had “extensive conversations” with voters about term limits and “limiting the power of an unelected bureaucrat city manager.”

In late July, the initiative received just over the required number of valid petition signatures to make it to the November ballot. 

Aurora voters have until Aug. 14 to protest the validity of the petition’s signatures.