Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council presses staff on high security and armored services costs; court and finance explain procurement
Summary
Councilors pressed staff about a seemingly large armored/security budget line during the court budget discussion; court leadership and finance staff said the city uses a cooperative purchase and Brink's vault services while Allied Security confirmed a current billable rate of $34.16/hour and staff budgeted renewal increases to be conservative.
A council inquiry about armored and court security costs prompted explanations from court leadership, finance staff and a vendor representative during El Mirage’s FY2026–27 budget work session.
A council member flagged the court security line and an apparent annual figure that he called "astronomical," asking why costs exceeded the per‑hour contract rates included in the materials. Judge Michael Perez Candola, who appeared with court administrators, thanked council for reviewing the submissions and asked court operations staff to answer technical questions.
Finance staff explained the city’s current services were procured through a cooperative purchase agreement with the City of Mesa and noted the city benefits from a Brink's vault agreement with Chase that speeds and secures deposits. The finance representative said the cooperative agreement set current rates and that staff plans to rebid or reprocure bundled services for the court and customer service locations to seek lower pricing when appropriate.
A vendor representative for Allied Security Services stated the current amendment carries a $34.16 hourly billable rate and that staff had extended the amendment through October 2026; staff said they budgeted conservatively to allow for an anticipated 6–8% increase at renewal and agreed to audit the contract pricing and provide more documentation.
What council asked for: council members requested the underlying contract terms and an audit of the pricing basis, including a breakdown showing how hourly rates translate to the annual budgeted totals. Staff committed to returning with contracts or excerpts and to test alternative providers when reprocurement is undertaken.
The discussion did not produce a vote; it resulted in staff follow-up to show contract language, historical billing, and planned procurement steps.
