and that's the current arrangement with securitas. we then embarked on a new process with purchasing and ms. cassi coleman in the legal office to rewrite, represent the bid package for a new bid for the security contract. that took several months. that went out to bid. we received five bids. the lowest actual bidder was found to be nonresponsive. the lowest bidder was abc security. the most expensive or the highest bidder was the current bidder securitas by almost half a million dollars. we have done our due diligence and vetted the current low bidder to be responsible. their paperwork is in order. their bond is in order. their bid is in order. their references check. they -- all of their documents say they are a union contractor. we fully expect them to abide by the terms and conditions of their contracts with their union partners just as they will abide by their contracts with us. and to this date we have absolutely no reason to find this bidder nonresponsive. should the board choose to not award the contract to abc and not award to

i would have to get back with you information of how that compares with securitas is paying. when they wrote in their bid that they are signatory to the union -- and maybe this is a false assumption on our part. we assumed it was the same union that securitas is signatory to, just like if you're a contractor and your signatory to the carpenter's union, it doesn't matter what company you are. the union signatory is the union signatory. and once you are signatory, you agree to abide by certain rules and regulations or there is a serious breach of that union agreement and there is a procedure to adjudicate -- >> that's what i presume. now, there are a couple questions. we do have contracts with private contractors where we require them to be -- we put in the bid specifications that they have to be union, that they actually have -- the one i'm thinking of is the transportation contract and it says right in there they have to contract with united transportation workers and honor their contract, right. which is, you know, we discussed that over the years a few times and it's quite

we've had securitas [speaker not understood]. so, yes, we are changing systems. change is a little bit difficult for all, but we respect the words that we heard from the people that talked tonight, and abc will have to honor and respect the contract they sign with us or it's not going to be a very happy relationship. so far i have no reason to think otherwise. >> and in your discussion with our counsel, ms. coleman, have you all sort of reasoned out what would happen in the event that during -- sometime during the contract thing didn't work out for the workers, as you said, you have no reason based on all the processes that have happened thus far to think anything would go wrong. but if something did go wrong, have you vetted with legal counsel what steps we would take, if any, at sfusd? >> i don't have the agreement in front of me, which was part of the bid proposal. and i do not know if there is language to that effect. i know that this vendor has stated that they are a union contractor. there were several that bid that were -- i think this one is -- obviously

i also work for securitas. they are no angels, i can tell you. they're a lot better than abc. thank you. >>> good evening, members of the board. my name is bob neil. i come before you not as a union official but as a member of the rank and file. the security contract is switching here with the unified school district. i work in an industry which is frequently run by duplicitous people. therefore, people who work in this industry must always be alert, aware. sometimes, yes, we even have to expect the absolute worst. abc security is a company which is known for its duplicity. what we're asking is that we understand you're going to go with abc security, but we're asking for your oversight on this matter to make sure that these people that work for you currently for securitas and soon to be abc do not lose their wages, no cut in their wages, no cuts in their benefits. thank you very much. >> thank you. all right. item g, consent calendar. may i hear a motion and a second, please? >> consent calendar. >> second. >> thank you. did you want to make a comment? [laughter] >> well, you

years ago, almost the exact same situation where abc security came in as the lowest bidder over securitas, over other union bidders, an extraordinarily low bid. we were at that time worried likewise that they might not work the contract at union rates. we have the same concern now and i think a handful of you were on the board at that time. for those who weren't, to give a little bit of background there, abc had this back and forth with your chief facilities officer and at the end of the day abc ended up withdrawing their bid because they could not both keep their responsibilities, their contractual agreements with us, union and simultaneously with you guys agreeing to work at the bid rates they claim they'd be able to come in on. so, we're having the same back and forth with them today. in this situation, we want to make certain that it's clear that first and foremost that you all are aware of what's going on. i regret we didn't have a chance to meet up with you guys -- 30 more seconds. we didn't have a chance to meet up with you guys earlier. this kind of came at us all of a sudden. we

we would prefer to have a long-term vendor having been reminded that securitas is actually the one who canceled their contract with us. >> [speaker not understood]. it does seem like it came out of nowhere. i wasn't ready to have this conversation at this level. but i think about the last process, and i think that one sort of came out of nowhere for us, at least for me as a board commissioner. and just as looking at this and the difference in dollar amounts -- and i'm more focusing on securitaz and the bid that you're presenting to us for a vote tonight. that sort of raises a flag for me already and i just feel like a head up would have been so much more helpful so i could do my due diligence and then ask questions that i don't have an opportunity to ask here because -- and i think many of these board members were here last time so i can't imagine our feeling or how we feel about certain things has changed radically. ~ this is something that is common knowledge about us, that we highly value our labor partnership and the staff and in particular to commissioner mendoza's point, the staf

for your oversight on this matter to make sure that these people that work for you currently for securitas and soon to be abc do not lose their wages, no cut in their wages, no cuts in their benefits. thank you very much. >> thank you. all right. item g, consent calendar. may i hear a motion and a second, please? >> consent calendar. >> second. >> thank you. did you want to make a comment? [laughter] >> well, you can always -- i'm getting to the next part and you can always make your comment there. any items withdrawn or corrected by the superintendent, mr. steel? >> yes, we have -- there is one correction to 4b. 138-13 k5 on page 105. there is a change of amount to sac code to 01-41 244-2 014-111 0-21 00-51 00-153. [multiple voices] >> the amount is changed from 29,400 to 24,400. everything else to k-5 is correct including the total cost. there is one item to withdraw from the agenda. this item 4b is 138-13 k 28 on pages 152 -- excuse me, 151 and 152. >> k-28 is [speaker not understood]. okay, thank you. any items removed for first reading by the board? seeing none, any items severed by t