Aurora has a problem it needs to solve, rather than ignore, no matter how banal and awkward it’s become.

The problem is that the city’s charter, which is akin to the nation’s constitution, says explicitly that the city manager has to live in Aurora, but he doesn’t.

Making this all the more awkward, knowing that City Manager Jason Batchelor lives outside the city, Aurora council members last year asked voters to repeal the residency requirement. Voters resoundingly said, “no,” with more than 8 out of 10 voters refusing to repeal the mandate.

City council can’t change the law themselves because it’s welded into the Aurora Charter. Only voters can change it.

Batchelor has worked for Aurora since 2009, working his way up to the top of the city’s organizational chart. He was appointed to the city’s top job in December 2023. Three months later, he rented a one-bedroom apartment in Aurora, keeping his home outside of the city, and he changed his voter registration to that apartment, a variety of state and county records show.

It’s unclear when, but city lawmakers say they were aware of the step-around, and that the city’s attorney said the apartment rental satisfies the residency requirement.

Last summer, however, the city council and management launched legislation that would refer a ballot question to voters, simply repealing the requirement for residency, which is imposed only on one employee in the city, the manager.

In a Sentinel story last week, City Attorney Pete Schulte pointed to city legislative notes indicating the timing of the measure was pegged to a Denver lawsuit. However, Denver employee residency restrictions, controversial for decades, ended in 1998 when Denver voters agreed to allow city employees to live anywhere in the six-county metro area. In 2001, Denver voters repealed the mandate completely.

All that came after the state legislature tried to prevent cities from imposing residency requirements. Denver sued and in 1990 the state Supreme Court struck down the state law, saying it’s a matter of local control.

Despite side-glances and hesitant explanations from a wide range of city officials, it’s clear that city lawmakers agreed to ask voters to repeal the law to accommodate Batchelor, and prevent the encumbrance on future city managers.

But voters overwhelmingly said no.

The dodgy problem here is that Aurora didn’t ask voters to end the requirement that the city manager reside in Aurora — unless he or she rents an apartment here. Yet just about every city lawmaker who talked to the Sentinel said they’re satisfied that the rental legally and ethically checks the residency box.

We doubt that any of the 57,631 voters who opposed the question would agree that renting an apartment while living somewhere else satisfies “the requirement that the City Manager reside within the city limits.” Pressing the point undermines the credibility of those who argue that it does.

Some of those defending the pretense make compelling arguments why Batchelor’s real residence has nothing to do with his performance as city manager.

We absolutely agree with that.

Batchelor has, in every position he’s held in Aurora, shown nothing but the utmost in competence, professionalism and dedication through his expanding leadership. Years of Sentinel reporters agree that Batchelor has consistently led by example.

But both his allies and detractors inside and outside of city hall agree that’s not the case in this well-accepted residency contrivance.

Renting an apartment to get around the law is disingenuous and an absurd waste of money.

We agree with Aurora lawmakers who say that the city did a poor job of explaining to voters how inane the residency requirement is, but they would have had to have been upfront with voters, explaining the Batchelor conundrum.

City employees and others rightfully point out that Aurora residents, visitors and other city employees have to adhere to city codes and policies unless they’re changed or repealed.

At a time when Aurora, the state and the entire nation are struggling against the ethical and legal lapses of the Trump administration, it does the cause to bring back the rule of law no good to emulate something his regime would do.

City council should either find an ethical and suitably legal way to allow Batchelor to live outside of Aurora and not waste money on a contrived apartment or go back to voters with something they’ll approve, possibly allowing the city manager to live in adjacent or nearby counties.

But pretending no one who matters cares about this is the stuff Trump is made of, not Aurora. 

Read more Spring Sports All-Aurora 2026: Full Aurora Sentinel All-Aurora Boys Swim Teams

Read more Former state CBI analyst pleads guilty in DNA testing scandal, faces up to 16 years in prison

Read more FIRST PERSON: Mayor Coffman sleeps at Aurora homeless shelter to gain insight