Review: Jan. 1, 2025 – Oct. 13, 2026; historical limits below
TCF Available-Record Grade 1.0 · Working model
Provisional — limited record. Three publication checks: workplace complaint intake, budget/staffing disclosure and public contact routes. The complaint audience is employees; it is not evidence of citizen complaint handling. No conduct is assessed.
Original saved artwork. Select the card to inspect it at full resolution.
| Category | Earned / assessed weight | Assessed checks / category coverage |
|---|---|---|
| Conduct, force and custody | NR (Unknown) | 0 of 7 (0%) |
| Accountability | 3.75 / 5 | 1 of 5 (20%) |
| Transparency | 2.5 / 5 | 1 of 4 (25%) |
| Training and supervision | NR (Unknown) | 0 of 2 (0%) |
| Service and communication | 3.75 / 5 | 1 of 2 (50%) |
The identified workplace harassment procedure supplies three of the four fixed complaint-publication components. It does not state a result-notification target. This is neither an assessment of actual complaint handling nor a general citizen misconduct-complaint route. Scope: Workplace audience only; one bounded publication snapshot.
Saved research · page 10The reviewed set supplies FY2025 operating/capital detail and distinct personnel categories, but no readable FY2026 police appropriation or dated filled/authorized roster reconciling service scope. Scope: City budget/personnel publication set only.
Saved research · page 10The downloaded court-stamped petition in 26LW-CC00086 names Aurora, Marionville and Wes Coatney and alleges harassment and retaliation involving 2025 events. Filing establishes the allegations made; no merits ruling, admission or current disposition was verified. Scope: Pleading, not a supported misconduct finding.
Saved research · page 10The bounded set supplies tip-line/office information, emergency 911 routing and a written records route. It does not supply police-service assistance or an escalation/response timetable. Actual response quality was not tested. Scope: Published contact information only.
Saved research · page 10Lawrence County Record reporting describes a separate Maples retaliation claim. The primary petition and current disposition were not obtained. Repeated reporting was not counted as separate events. Scope: Attributed report; unresolved allegation.
Saved research · page 10The city manager report announced a March 1 body-camera launch. Completed implementation, footage availability and compliance were not verified. Scope: Planned agency change; no implementation points.
Saved research · page 10County board minutes record Aurora officials raising a temporary early-January 911 outage and discussion of review. Completed corrective action was not verified. Scope: County dispatch system; no unsupported attribution of operational fault to Aurora.
Saved research · page 10KY3 reported a fatal pursuit crash and the police account of extraction and CPR. Fuller records were unavailable. Neither the death nor an agency account establishes compliance or misconduct. Scope: Incomplete pursuit/care evidence; no outcome points.
Saved research · page 11TCF Available-Record Grade 1.0 is an editorial assessment of the cited assessable record, not a validated measure of overall department quality. Unknown checks earn neither credit nor penalty. Coverage measures rubric weight, not the fraction of officers or incidents reviewed. Fixed weights and component anchors are editorial choices, not validated measures of overall department quality. The evidence mix changes the effective category weights. All assessed checks in this run concern public information or procedures. Coverage measures rubric weight, not the share of incidents or officers reviewed. This bounded public-web review is not exhaustive. No records request or agency response request was sent. The existing Aurora report uses a different method; these scores cannot establish a change in agency performance. The workplace complaint policy does not establish citizen misconduct-complaint access or actual implementation. Prior joint Aurora-Marionville data cannot be assumed to describe Aurora-only staffing. Old method labels and old rounded scores were not carried into the new calculation. No complete operational event sample or full department audit was obtained. The only assessable units are three public information/procedure snapshots; conduct and training/supervision remain unassessed. This is not an exhaustive search or a claim of department-wide compliance.
Links reproduced from the saved research. Findings retain the report’s original review date.
TCF did not request an agency response for this pilot. Public agency statements are attributed in the source notes. No inference of refusal or noncooperation is made. No additional contact was made for this migration.