Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to increase Munis Contract No. 3190000026, formerly Blanket Purchase Order No. BPLB19000026, with GSSi, Inc., dba General Security Service, of Wilmington, CA, for providing security guard services, by $454,500, with a 10 percent contingency of $45,450, for a revised total contract amount not to exceed $999,900, and extend the term to March 9, 2020.  (Citywide)
I did not to put. And today's report from Financial Management. Recommendation to increase Munis Contract with GSI or providing security guard services by 454,500 city. Vice Mayor. Yes. Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much. You know, I put this out there because, you know, I was somewhat disappointed in the contract because probably our analysis made a lot of assumptions. I'm not comfortable, you know, sourcing out for public safety service unless extremely necessary. Also, it was shameful that we are having to have a discussion on contracts so close to the expiration date. Long Beach have always had employ a dedicated workforce and a special security office to protect us. Civic facilities have done and continue to do an outstanding job. I'm hoping to meet. I'm hoping to meet and confer a process. We work with them and find a way to bring these jobs back to our city employees. When the contracts conclude. With that, I would like to make a motion to approve this contract. But the clause that our city manager worked to the best ability to find a solution that will restore the majority of these positions back to the city employees when this contract terminates. And that report, the city and we put it back to the city and return with a plan before the end of the year. I'm hoping I can get a second. And thank you very much. You have you have a second there. There is no public comment on this item. Councilman Pierce. I'm sorry. Country Ranga. Thank you, Mayor. I'm very. I'll be happy to second that motion. One of the things that I think that we're missing here is the fact that when you do a Prop hour study, it's not only about finding out whether we need the services at all, but whether we need to hire more staff. And I think that this approach that we're having, the way we're looking at this is is reversed. We're looking at the fact that the services that we need are to cover positions that we don't have. And we need the supplemental services provided by this agency, when, in fact, we should probably be looking at creating more positions that our city employees can provide because those are continuing services as we go, for example, security at the library, that that would be something that's in part of our internal service that we should have as city and have city employees provide that service as opposed to a contract service. So that's, I think, the essence of of of what we're what the motion is trying to to present here is the fact that we need to have a review. Whether are we are we properly staffed in in our security services classification to provide the services that are needed on a on a continuing basis and not have to rely on contracts to provide that service. Thank you. Councilmember, there's a motion and a second. Please go ahead. And Castro votes. Councilmember Pearce. In public. There's no public comment. Look. Motion carries.