I think if you check with people you know in law enforcement, you will find that the 'testing' conducted by a department in the search for a new firearm is not very scientific.
One, the need for a new firearm is created, generally by someone with 'pull' in the department saying the current issue is unreliable, breaking too often, or there is better technology 'out there'. That someone usually already has their opinion on what the ideal new firearm should be.
Two, the word is put out that the department is looking for a new firearm. This results in several vendor samples appearing on the department's doorstep for testing. In many cases, the someone who convinced the chief or Sheriff a new firearm is needed ends up being in charge of the testing.
Three, a group of officers selected by the someone conduct the testing. The someone is careful to include a few 'rankers' to participate to show that the input of the average patrol officer was considered. Generally at least a day is spent at the range, with the evaluators shooting up a bunch of ammo and having a good time away from their regular duties. Eventually a recommendation is formed as to which firearm the department should purchase.
Four, that recommendation is placed before the chief or Sheriff. Then the top brass in the command staff, many who haven't been to the range in years, weigh in with their recommendations. There will be two schools of thought. One, the department should stick with a newer version of the existing issue firearm so that training and transition costs will be kept low. Two, the department needs to step into the 'xx' century and get the latest technology available, etc.
Five, the head of the department makes his decision and goes to the city council or the county supervisors and makes a pitch for a new gun. He makes a strong case the current issue firearm is a piece of junk, fails repeatedly on the range, and the lives of his officers are at stake. The governing body gives in and authorizes the purchase of the new firearm.
Six, somewhere along the way a suggestion is made by the shooters in the department to let the officer decide what he wants to carry. Unless the chief or Sheriff is a shooter himself, this suggestion is quashed as being ridiculous. The reasons are many, but generally it centers on simplicity in training, uniform look of the officers, and granting individual choice may result in the officers all preferring something different from the department's choice in firearms.
Seven, bids are solicited and invariably the vendor offers to take the department's old firearms in trade. Said vendor offers to sell at a reasonable price these trade ins back to individual officers at a very good price. If enough officers choose to buy their old issue firearm, it invariably raises the question with the governing body, "If the old guns were such junk, why are all the officers buying them from the vendor?"
Eight, transition training is conducted at the range, where if the department is good on training, anywhere from one to three days is spent transitioning to the new firearm. In careless departments, the officer fires the qualification course once and 'transition' is completed in less than an hour and fifty rounds expended.
Nine, this cycle repeats itself very 8-10 years.
Pilgrim
. The PD also got funding for new duty holsters too.