Aurora delays vote on APD drive-test scanner after questions on vendor selection

A resolution to authorize the Director of Purchasing to buy a drive-test data scanner for the Aurora Police Department — identified in committee as Item 25-0378 and budgeted up to $170,000 using forfeiture funds — was discussed at length and sent back as unfinished business on Nov. 18.

Finance Chair outlined the item’s multi-committee history and said the scanner is intended to reduce outsourcing costs and speed evidence acquisition for court. Two vendors responded: a lower-priced bidder described as the "5 8 group" and a higher bid from LexisNexis (about $25,000 higher, per staff). Purchasing staff said the RFP evaluation scored both price and the training package: 5 8 group proposed in-depth two-to-three day training with classroom and field exercises, while LexisNexis’ training was characterized as less extensive.

Several aldermen raised concerns unrelated to the formal RFP scoring about the reputation and background of individuals associated with the lower bidder. One council member called the negative online claims “the elephant in the room” and asked whether allegations about an individual’s conduct should factor into a procurement decision. Corporation counsel said the city, as a home-rule municipality, retains discretion to select vendors but also noted competitive-bidding ordinances and declined to address litigation risk publicly. Purchasing director Jillian/Jolene Coulter said evaluators focused on qualifications, equipment and training rather than personal background checks beyond references.

APD investigator Daryl Moore told the council he had attended training by both bidders and found the instruction comparable, saying, “Anytime I've been in his class, it's always been top notch,” and added he had no concerns about the lower bidder’s training quality.

Outcome: The mayor and finance chair recommended, and the committee accepted, sending the item to unfinished business to give council time to consider possible amendments (including substituting LexisNexis) and to allow legal review. The resolution will return for a future council session with any proposed amendments and legal input.

What’s next: Council members interested in proposing an amendment to select the higher bidder or otherwise change the procurement were asked to work with legal before the next city council meeting so an up-or-down vote can be taken.