Council members debated whether to issue an RFP for contracted public‑safety services and whether to restore the city’s in‑house public‑safety officers during a lengthy discussion of agenda item 7a.

Councilmember Manny Acosta urged the council to keep the city’s public‑safety officers rather than pursuing outside contractors, citing cost comparisons and public‑safety priorities. Several council members and the city attorney clarified that the item before the council was limited to authorizing the RFP; restoring a public‑safety department would be a separate action.

Councilmember Acosta moved to deny the RFP; that motion failed. A separate motion to restore the public‑safety department also failed on roll call. Afterwards a motion was made to approve agenda item 7a (the RFP for public‑safety services). The council recorded the roll call as follows during the final vote on agenda item 7a: Councilmember Zacosta recorded “No”; Mayor Pro Tem Delgado recorded “Yes”; Mayor Ramos recorded “No.” The mayor announced the motion passed. The transcript does not supply a complete recorded yes/no list for every council member in the final tally in the excerpt provided.

City staff and the city attorney clarified procedural differences between denying the RFP, restoring the department and other related personnel or code‑enforcement items; the council treated each measure as a separate motion and vote. No contractor was approved tonight; the approved action authorizes staff to move forward with the RFP process as described in item 7a.

The council did not adopt additional changes to staffing or funding at this meeting; members who opposed the RFP emphasized a desire to retain in‑house public‑safety personnel and noted budget constraints discussed in June budget hearings.