Aurora voters appear to approve mayoral recall referendum question
It appears Aurora voters have approved a referendum question that would establish mechanisms to allow for the recall of a sitting mayor in the city.
As of late Tuesday evening, a majority of voters supported the measure in all four counties that touch Aurora.
According to unofficial numbers, the measure was approved by 59% of voters in the Kane County portion of the city, 63% of voters in the DuPage County section, 59% in the Will County section and 58% of voters in the Kendall County section.
Adam Pauley, an advocate with the group formed to support the recall referendum, Aurora for Change, said the referendum question received more support than he “ever expected.”
Another leader with the group, Danny Souri, said he felt “pure shock.”
The referendum question asked voters if they wanted the city to adopt mechanisms that would allow a sitting mayor to be recalled before their term expires.
“This means that we have brought additional accountability for our leadership,” said Pauley. “We’ve made people more free. They now have the ability to recall elected officials.”
Pauley said he did not plan to be involved with the recall mechanism any further, but Souri said he had a few plans.
Souri said he plans on being involved with an effort to place a question asking Aurora residents if they would like to recall current Aurora Mayor John Laesch on the spring 2027 ballot. He said he already received interest from Aurora residents in pursuing a spring recall ballot measure.
“There is a tremendous amount of interest from a tremendous amount of private citizens that once this thing passes, they’re ready to speak out,” he said.
He said, however, that advocates with Aurora for Change decided that the group itself would not pursue recalling any elected officials.
Opponents of the recall referendum, including Laesch, said they felt disappointed by the support for the referendum question Tuesday.
“It is unfortunate,” Laesch said. “I don’t think voters realize that it will turn Aurora into a perpetual toxic political campaign.”
Laesch has previously said he believes the measure could allow a candidate who loses an election to gather signatures and promote a recall effort. He said he worries this could undermine the votes that put the winning candidate in office, create “perpetual campaigns” where elections become more expensive, cause voter fatigue and create more work and financial costs for county clerks, electoral boards and electoral officials.
Aurora resident Helen Francis Ratzlow, who has formally filed objections to the referendum in court, said Tuesday night that she felt concerned that the recall mechanism could cause “chaos.”
She is concerned that those who backed the referendum would use the momentum from Tuesday’s election to attempt to recall Laesch.
“Anybody with a grudge and deep pockets can initiate a recall and cause chaos,” she said. “There would be no continuity.”
Under the proposed recall mechanism, residents seeking to recall a sitting mayor would need to circulate petitions and collect at least enough signatures to equal 20% of the total votes cast in the most recent mayoral election, according to the referendum question.
If a recall petition received enough signatures, then the recall would go to a general vote in the next election.
The elected official would then be removed from office if the majority of voters cast their ballots in favor of the recall. The Aurora City Council would have 30 days to fill the vacancy, and if there’s more than 13 months remaining in the mayor’s term, then a special election would be held to fill the seat within nine months.
awright@chicagotribune.com