Apparently, Aurora has slipped into a political version of “Back to the Future.”
Sixteen months after voters settled a highly contentious mayoral race between John Laesch and Richard Ivin, we’re somehow back to where we started – with these two political enemies again going at each other.
The difference this time? Former Mayor Irvin isn’t trying to win his old office – at least not yet. He’s trying to help create a way that could take it away from current Mayor Laesch.
A self-professed nonpartisan group recently submitted nearly 9,000 total signatures seeking to put two questions on the November ballot. One would create a process for recalling a sitting mayor, the other would establish a similar mechanism for at-large aldermen. Whether enough of those signatures survive a challenge is one question, and whether Aurora legally has the authority to create such a recall system is another.
But that’s not stopped the current and former mayors – who duked it out in what many describe as the nastiest local election in recent history – from going at it again. Laesch, who admits walking door to door on his off-hours to check on signature authenticity concerning the recall effort, and of poring over spreadsheets in his home late at night looking for fraud, describes this recall referendum effort as a “campaign stunt” funded by Irvin “to keep us distracted and not focused on running the city.”
This recall referendum effort, Laesch said, has forced him to “walk a fine line.” Not even two years into his first term, it’s no surprise the mayor would have no campaign headquarters or a campaign manager to handle the influx of media inquiries about this recall referendum issue. All of which, he tells me, is taking away from important city issues, including the special census recount and the budget which, despite last year’s cuts, “still has a deficit and the longer it takes to deal with it the larger it gets.”
Laesch and his supporters with Working Families Aurora claim the referendum question “would allow 20% of the people who voted in the previous election to initiate a recall, effectively overriding the will of the 50% of the electorate who voted for the mayor or any alderman at-large.”
They also have filed objections contending there’s already a recall process in place, and that the 9,000 signatures touted by Irvin are misleading, saying they not only include non-residents and non-voters but those who signed both the mayoral and aldermen at-large petitions.
But Irvin puts his confidence in those 9,000 signatures, which he believes speak to how unsatisfied voters are with the current administration. While many see this recall referendum push as a long-shot, he vehemently disagrees, and insists the $14,000 he contributed to it is “an investment” in Aurora he’d gladly make again.
“I would spend my last dollar fighting for the city I love and for the people of Aurora to have a strong voice,” he says in a fiery Facebook post that sounds like he has every intention of running for mayor again.
More Top Picks Best Daypacks
Irvin insists “you’re reading between the lines” when I asked if he’s already throwing his hat into that political ring. His biggest concern, he maintains, is about Aurora going backwards under the current administration after enjoying “so much progress” when he was mayor.
There’s no question Laesch’s time in office has been controversial – with battles over fire department staffing and his original choice of an outsider to lead the department; friction with police; painful budget cuts, which included slashing funds to Aurora’s beloved Paramount Theatre; and sweeping ethics reforms that have challenged the city’s old political establishment.
Laesch argues Aurora has given away too much to developers and that economic growth should produce better-paying jobs without adding on corporate subsidies. But critics contend his progressive, some would call it socialist, approach to government has made Aurora less attractive to business and economic development. They point to his skepticism of tax incentives and TIFs, his emphasis on living wage and environmental requirements and his resistance to taxpayer subsidies for private development.
Whether any of those criticisms rise to the level of a recall is up for debate. Even those who don’t support Laesch have expressed mixed emotions over the recall referendum effort. That includes Ald. Carl Franco, 5th Ward, who told me that in these times of rampant disinformation and low voter turnout, there’s a “significant amount of buyer’s remorse and a recall allows for a process to combat all that.”
At the same time, he has noticed confusion among voters about the recall effort and the referendum question he’d like to see on the April ballot that would change Aurora’s “strong mayor” form of government to a city manager style. That referendum question, he believes, has a better chance of passing because more cities are going that route. And residents see it as a way of taking politics out of the equation by bringing more stability, continuity and professionalism to City Hall.
One thing is for sure: This recall referendum issue is going to eat up considerable time, energy and money before there is a resolution. In the meantime, the wounds of the last mayoral election have been ripped open, with accusations flying from both sides that contribute to the divisiveness permeating all levels of politics, including those closest to home.
So what’s an Aurora resident to do? Pay attention. Look beyond the Facebook battles. Weigh the information that’s out there. Decide for yourself what matters to you, your family and your community. Then go vote – in the November election and again in the spring and beyond.
If Aurora is going back to the future, it ought to be the people who decide what direction it is heading.