Aurora to request migrant placement records from Denver, state of Colorado
3 hours ago
AURORA, Colo. -- The Aurora City Council voted Monday to direct City Manager Jason Batchelor to use a Colorado Open Records Act request to obtain information from the City and County of Denver and the State of Colorado about how migrants were settled in Aurora apartments.
Aurora has attracted the nation’s attention due to claims by former President Donald Trump that Venezuelan gangs have overtaken the city. Indeed, some buildings in the city have fallen under the control of gangs, police admitted after initially downplaying reports. Throughout the entire ordeal, council member Danielle Jurinsky, who spoke at Trump’s rally in Aurora, has maintained that Denver placed many of the migrants in Aurora. She sponsored the resolution authorizing the investigation.
Denver spokesman: We didn’t ‘place’ migrants
In an email, Denver spokesman Jon Ewing denied that city money was used to place migrants in any of the troubled Aurora buildings. But he did say non-profits, which received money from the city, placed immigrants wherever they requested to be placed. He said it’s true that migrants who came through Denver have settled in Aurora and other cities.
"We did not place anyone in those apartments," Ewing said in the statement. "As we’ve said from the beginning, nonprofits used their own resources to help people cover the first month’s rent, deposit and security fees. Even then, this was only done after the newcomers themselves chose their own apartments. The nonprofits, to my understanding, did not select which units people stayed in. The only noteworthy times city dollars have been used to cover rent or deposits is with the DASP program or when we resolved a large encampment on Zuni in January, and I was told that no one from that encampment was placed in those apartment complexes."
Jurinsky, Coffman not convinced
Jurinsky said Monday that Aurorans deserve to know if Denver and the state placed the migrants there. Aurora is already the most diverse city in Colorado, with one in five residents born outside the country. Aurora already has thriving migrant communities that likely attracted asylum seekers.
Council members Alison Coombs and Crystal Murillo voted against the resolution. They feared the council would target non-profits that work with migrants and revoke funding. Jurinsky said she does not believe the city should be funding any non-profits.
Zvonek resolution targets non-profits
Also Monday, during the council’s study session, Mayor Pro Tem Dustin Zvonek sponsored a resolution to require non-profits receiving funding from the city to meet specific criteria. “The policy should specify that those non-profits requesting funding must be providing services that support the health and general welfare of Aurora citizens,” according to a memo from city staff to council. “Those organizations that do not fulfill this criteria should only be eligible for grant funding with the requirement that they must specify that their program aligns with the City’s priorities. All funding in this last category must be approved by City Council. The resolution will mandate that the city manager shall present a report to City Council on this issue at the annual budget workshop.” The council advanced the resolution to a regular council meeting for a formal vote.
Mayor Mike Coffman defended Jurinsky’s resolution, admonishing Denver for not consulting Aurora before allowing migrants to be placed there. “We need to make sure it never happens again.”
Jurinsky and Coffman both said the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development requires that lodging for migrants be inspected and deemed inhabitable. They wondered how migrants could have been placed in buildings as rundown as those having the problems. They reiterated that the taxpayers deserve answers.
Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
It’s essential to note our commitment to transparency:
Our Terms of Use acknowledge that our services may not always be error-free, and our Community Standards emphasize our discretion in enforcing policies. As a platform hosting over 100,000 pieces of content published daily, we cannot pre-vet content, but we strive to foster a dynamic environment for free expression and robust discourse through safety guardrails of human and AI moderation.