Finance committee narrowly approves 3‑year renewal for city network managed services after questions about vendor and staffing

The Aurora Finance Committee on June 25 approved a three‑year renewal of the city’s managed‑services network contract after a detailed presentation and several rounds of questioning; the measure passed by roll‑call, 4–1.

Jeff Anderson, deputy CIO, presented financial and operational history for the contract (item 26‑0361) and recommended a three‑year renewal at a price shown in the packet (the agenda item lists $2,168,127). Anderson said the managed‑service arrangement has allowed the city to extend network coverage to more facilities over the last five years and that the negotiated renewal includes a lease‑to‑own path whereby the city would own equipment outright by about 2028. Anderson told the committee the negotiated contract covers up to 650 devices now (the city currently inventories about 643 devices) and that the vendor will help manage up to 700 devices as a buffer.

Committee members pressed staff about perimeter firewall management and whether the city has the staff and 24/7 coverage to assume full responsibility. Anderson and Ram Tyagi (CIU) said the city owns the purchased perimeter firewalls and that the city purchased FortiCare support (resold through the incumbent vendor) to handle complex issues; they said staff are pursuing Fortinet certification and that the perimeter firewall count is small (about nine devices), which made in‑house management more feasible in their view.

Aldermen also raised procurement and labor‑compliance questions. Jolene Coulter, director of purchasing, said the presented agreement appears to be a professional‑services contract and not a labor contract subject to the city’s Responsible Bidders Ordinance prevailing‑wage/apprenticeship provisions. Committee members noted a 2023 judgment reported in the record related to wage issues involving the vendor; staff said they would continue to review FOIA materials and documentation before final council action.

"Our recommendation is to go with a 3 year solution here ... at the end of the 3 years not only is our staff going to be trained up, we will also own the equipment outright," Anderson said, describing the trade‑offs compared with a one‑year option or an immediate buyout.

The committee took a roll‑call vote: four members voted yes and one (Chairman Maciakos) voted no; motion passed 4–1. Staff said next steps include completing contract execution and coordinating any transition work to prepare for equipment ownership and potential in‑house operations.

Note on vendor name in the record: the transcript uses multiple spellings for the incumbent vendor (examples: "Scintel," "Scientel," "Sciontell"). City staff in the meeting repeatedly referred to the incumbent as pronounced like "Scintel;" procurement staff indicated they have existing contracts with that vendor. The record contains an item header naming "Science Health Solutions" as the contracting party; the committee discussion and staff remarks consistently referenced the incumbent managed‑services vendor by the shorthand staff used. The transcript inconsistently renders the vendor legal name; the committee discussion focused on contract structure, device counts and support arrangements rather than a change of vendors.