Council questions armored-response vehicle purchase as commander and residents defend safety case

Commander Roy Maddox defended the police department’s recommendation for a new Linco Bearcat, telling the council that the department researched multiple options and found purpose-built vehicles offer more protection and interoperability. “The Bearcat is 100% used as a de escalation tool,” Maddox said, adding that the city’s current Bearcat has been in service about 20 years and has been shot at multiple times.

Alderwoman Notriano and other council members pressed for alternatives and for clearer oversight. Notriano told Maddox she had asked the chief to look at other options after the budget presentation and said she had not received a follow-up. Notriano said she wanted the department to consider how purchases look to the public amid national concerns about policing tactics and that she would like to see the department’s deployment matrix. Maddox said the matrix is an internal document but offered that the chief could share it and described the Bearcat’s use thresholds as high-threat incidents such as armed barricades, hostage situations and high-risk warrants.

Councilors and public commenters raised two central concerns: whether the vehicle’s protective advantages justify the roughly half-million-dollar replacement cost cited in debate, and whether a modified commercial truck would meet operational needs. Maddox said modified trucks (described in council discussion as up‑armored F-550 variants) often lack armor in the hood and front fenders, have conventional tires (not run-flat tires), and differ in turret and equipment configurations. “Those vehicles are super heavy. They’re going to be embedded wherever they’re at more than likely,” he said, noting Bearcats have run-flat tires and a tested operational record.

Supporters on the council described physical damage to the current vehicle as persuasive. Alderman Hanauer said seeing bullet marks changed his view and that officer safety can outweigh cost concerns. “Sometimes the safety of our officers are more important than the money,” he said.

Residents and veterans who spoke during public comment disputed some of the technical claims and criticized the optics of acquiring another armored vehicle. One public speaker who said he served in combat called fears of 50‑caliber attacks “laughable” in the local context and warned against turning local policing into a military posture. Others urged more transparency about how often the vehicle is deployed; Maddox and other speakers estimated use at roughly 15 to 50 times per year depending on the year.

What happens next: The purchase and related ordinance were part of budget and first‑reading items; council members repeatedly referenced further committee discussion next week and the possibility of receiving the chief’s deployment matrix. No final procurement vote was recorded during the meeting.