Schools and Education Decision on Security Firm's Lawsuit Against Manatee School District Delayed by Judge

BRADENTON — A Manatee County Circuit Court hearing was held Thursday regarding Sarasota Security Patrol's lawsuit against the Manatee School District. After oral arguments were given, both parties were advised by Judge John Lakin that each would have to submit their own proposed orders within 10 days; the judge would then make a decision on the case.

The school district had contracted with the firm to provide armed guards at its elementary schools, achieving a savings of about 2/3 of the cost of using local law enforcement officers. Questions arose as to whether the measure, which would be the first of its kind, violated state statute, though it was later supported in an opinion issued by Attorney General Pam Bondi.

However, during the selection process, the district failed to properly notice one of the meetings. Though it had recorded the meeting and did not close it to the public, it was hit with a sunshine lawsuit, leading the district to ultimately cancel the contract. 

At the heart of the lawsuit are the validity of the contract between the district and SSP; the contract's cancellation following the sunshine lawsuit; and whether Superintendent Mills had the authority to cancel it without the school board's approval.

Sarasota Security Patrol had been contracted to provide private security guards for the district's elementary schools; the district cancelled the contract just weeks after the firm's guards had started patrolling the campuses.

The district, represented by Blalock Walter attorney Fred Moore, argued that there was no valid contract in the first place due to Sunshine law being violated during the RFP process.

John Montgomery of Montgomery Law Firm, who represented SSP, has argued that the superintendent had no legal authority to cancel the contract by himself, and could only bring his recommendation to cancel before the school board.

Earlier this week, the district received voluntarily dismissal from the lawsuit's third cause of action by the security firm. That cause of action was based upon failure to pay outstanding invoices from services rendered, as confirmed by school district staff attorney Mitch Teitelbaum.