Lobbying, tension abound as Oakland ditches company tied to presumed FBI informant

OAKLAND — It is proving trickier than expected for Oakland to move on from its contracted private security company, which last year found itself uncomfortably linked to a corruption scandal at City Hall that led to criminal charges against ex-Mayor Sheng Thao.

City leaders are torn between a pair of leading suitors that, beyond their mutual interest in replacing the existing contractor, have wildly different aspirations: an immigrant-owned local business with strong political connections in Oakland versus a mega-corporation with hundreds of thousands of employees.

Tensions are rising around City Hall with days left to figure out a plan.

Private security guards may not be particularly well-paid, but their employers rake in lucrative profits from public dollars. In this case, Oakland is offering $27 million over three years — with options for a pair of one-year extensions — to provide security guards at city facilities.

The city’s indecision is quickly descending into a kind of politics that does not involve accusations of corruption but seems to reflect other, familiar tropes of city government: aggressive lobbying, messy political maneuvering and complaints of bias among city officials.

“There is no perfect system for this — there can be none,” said Henry Gardner, a former city manager, who added, “We all need to model a (certain) behavior so there is not even the appearance of favoritism or undue influence.”

Both firms are vying to replace ABC Security, a company that has held the contract since 2018 and whose chief executive was closely tied to a central figure in the federal corruption case filed in January against Thao, her romantic partner and the businessmen accused of bribing the former mayor.

Ana Chretien, the company’s CEO, had extensive business dealings with a likely co-conspirator in the bribery scheme, Mario Juarez — the two representing the same real-estate company and swapping several commercial properties between each other over the course of a few years. Chretien could not be reached for comment.

Last year, Alameda County prosecutors accused ABC Security of having a financial stake in Thao’s electoral victory, part of a motion in a felony case involving Juarez that was later dismissed. Neither Chretien nor ABC Security was ever charged by county prosecutors, and they were not mentioned in the federal indictments filed in January.

Months earlier, the city had extended ABC Security’s deal, though council members agreed at the time to begin a full search for its next contractor, with then-Councilmember Treva Reid noting that “public concerns” had surfaced about the incumbent firm.

Now, the city’s efforts to find a new security partner are quickly becoming strained, leaving Oakland with the prospect of being stuck with ABC Security on a month-to-month basis.

“There has been a lot of lobbying from all sides,” Councilmember Zac Unger said.

Allied Universal, the world’s largest private security provider, scored the highest in Oakland’s vetting process, while the second-place finisher, Marina Security Services, has a CEO who has lived in the city for decades and donated widely in local political races.

ABC Security finished last place among five applicants.

Some city officials appeared to view the process as relatively open-and-shut: Allied and Marina scored equally in reviews of their written proposals, but the larger vendor gained a critical edge in interviews with a selection panel of city staffers.

Both were prepared to partner in the contract with a local, Black-owned small business, Diligence Security Group.

But when a committee of City Council members convened last week to discuss advancing Allied to the stage of a final decision, three elected leaders — Ken Houston, Noel Gallo and Charlene Wang — instead pushed through a vote for Marina.

A week later, the tentative decision remains in limbo at the committee stage; officials have not yet scheduled it to be heard by the full council.

Houston, who clearly appeared to prefer Marina, grilled city officials at the meeting about their vetting process and whether Marina’s established local presence had received sufficient weight.

Wang, meanwhile, pushed unsuccessfully for a full re-evaluation, citing a long list of lawsuits and allegations of misconduct against Allied, one of the U.S.’s largest employers.

“I want to ensure, when we are about to award a major, major contract, that these controversies are surfaced,” said Wang, who later added, “the smaller companies (that) have more skin in the game actually perform higher-quality services.”

It is not the first time Allied has received scrutiny. A Time Magazine exposé published in 2023 reported numerous alleged failings in how Allied hires, pays and trains security guards, as well as the company’s widespread acquisition of smaller security firms, which has ballooned Allied’s market share.

Later that year, the company agreed to pay $1.1 million in back wages to hundreds of employees in response to a Labor Department violation, according to Bloomberg Law.

With an office on Hegenberger Road in Oakland, Allied provides security guards at over 130 commercial sites in town. Nearly 72% of the guards are Black, said Courtney White, a representative who described Allied as a “local employer” that prioritizes community outreach.

Unger, the council member who cast the lone vote against Marina at the committee meeting, noted in an interview that security companies “get sued a lot — and the larger companies probably get sued proportionally more than the smaller companies.”

Indeed, Marina was similarly hit in May with a class-action lawsuit alleging the company failed to pay minimum wages or overtime, or offer sufficient breaks to its workers, among other alleged labor violations.

Attorneys for the lead plaintiff, Jasmine Monroy Cortez, did not respond to an interview request. The company’s workers unionized in 2024, joining the country’s largest labor group for security guards — an SEIU chapter named United Service Workers West, which also represents guards employed by Allied.

Marina appears to be having a rough summer. Last month, it lost out on a new contract worth nearly $6 million annually with the Peralta Community College District, ending a five-year relationship providing security to the district’s four campuses.

The company’s proposal finished in third place. But its CEO, Sam Tadesse, said the process lacked “transparency, fairness and equity,” namely because of a last-minute change to the contract expectations that Peralta officials blamed on an earlier clerical error.

Peralta’s head of operations, Greg Nelson, said in an interview that one of the new terms Marina did not agree with was a penalty for unwarranted use of force. In a statement to this news organization, Tadesse did not clarify which terms his company took issue with.

Tadesse followed a similar line of argument against the city of Oakland’s selection of a security contractor, saying “there are still many unanswered questions surrounding the interview process” that placed Allied in the lead for the $27 million deal.

Later in his statement, Tadesse more directly accused the city staff of being biased, because his company saw the greatest variance in scores awarded by different members of the selection panel. “Were they trying to score Marina lower?” he asked.

An immigrant of Ethiopia who has lived in Oakland for nearly four decades, Tadesse represents the kind of small-business success that city officials tout when praising Oakland’s diversity. Marina has security deals with the city and counties of San Francisco, as well as at Los Angeles International Airport.

In turn, Tadesse is closely allied with local politicians, having donated over $23,000 to candidates for various local elected offices since 2019, including $900 to the 2022 campaign of first-term Councilmember Kevin Jenkins, who previously sat on the Peralta board.

It remains to be seen if Oakland’s leaders will ultimately buck from the advice of staff to push the contract toward Marina — a process that, because of a planned summer recess, could sit in limbo until the end of September if the council does not act in the coming days.

The fraught process helps illuminate the ugly business behind city contracts, although it is also nothing new. Amid Oakland’s search for a contractor in 2011, the city auditor flagged some suspicious campaign contributions to council members who would vote on the deal, questioning the legality of the political spending.

The donors in question: Chretian and her security firm, ABC Security, plus Tadesse and his company, Marina Security Services.

Staff writer Jakob Rodgers contributed reporting.

Shomik Mukherjee is a reporter covering Oakland. Call or text him at 510-905-5495 or email him at smukherjee@bayareanewsgroup.com.