Manatee district kicked them out of their charter school. They fire back with federal lawsuit

Former employees of Lincoln Memorial Academy have launched a new front in their battle with the School District of Manatee County.

Eddie Hundley, the school’s founder and former principal, filed a civil rights lawsuit in federal court on Tuesday, along with Melvia Scott, Jauana Phillips and Katrina Ross, all former Lincoln Memorial employees. The group is represented by attorney Roderick Ford, through the Methodist Law Centre and the PMJA Legal Defense Fund.

The school board voted to revoke Lincoln Memorial’s charter and take over its campus last July, citing concerns with the school’s finances and leadership.

Former employees are alleging that the school district sabotaged Lincoln Memorial, a public school that converted into a charter, because it was founded by an African American man for the benefit of his community.

“LMA was designed to redress the grievances of African American parents of underprivileged children with respect to the provision of their education and concerns that public-school funding for the public schools in their neighborhoods were being sabotaged or diverted,” the complaint states.

In response, district spokesman Mike Barber declined to comment, citing the pending litigation. He instead provided a 95-page order filed in the Division of Administrative Hearings, which upheld Manatee’s decision to revoke the school’s charter and to retake control of Lincoln Memorial.

State says takeover of school was justified

In his order, Judge Robert Cohen said there was an “extensive amount of evidence and testimony” to support immediate termination of Lincoln Memorial’s charter. He reached the conclusion after a four-day hearing in August.

Former school officials are now raising a new issue. Hundley and his supporters believe the city of Palmetto and the school district — both defendants in the case — worked together to create a false water shut-off notice, which was entered into evidence.

Former employees believe the notice was a coordinated attack on their school, making it appear as though Lincoln Memorial was unable to pay its water bill and provide for its students.

While the school was 17 days past the due date, the notice said Lincoln Memorial “was now 45 days past due” on its water bill. School supporters also found it suspicious that a city employee sent the document to school Superintendent Cynthia Saunders on July 22, just one day before the school takeover, on behalf of Palmetto Mayor Shirley Groover Bryant.

City officials denied the claim in a past statement, calling the shut-off notice a legitimate reminder about Lincoln Memorial’s overdue water bill. City attorney Mark Barnebey previously said the bill included a “typographical error,” and while they were 17 days past the due date, school officials were nearly 45 days past the original billing date, prompting a lawful notice.

In his final order, Judge Cohen said the shut-off notice was “perhaps the most inexplicable failure to pay issue,” and it now represents a central issue for Lincoln Memorial supporters. Former school officials are now fighting the judge’s order in a state appeals court, and their attorney recently tried to halt the appeal and petition for a redo on the original hearing, based on the water bill issue.

In response, attorney Erin Jackson said the school was unable to pay its bills, and the issue extended far beyond late water notices. The judge considered Lincoln Memorial’s debt to the IRS and the Florida Retirement System, along with the loss of its food vendor (another result of missed payments), and the failure to properly screen new employees.

“Even assuming that the new evidence allegedly acquired by Appellant demonstrated that Appellee engaged in fraud — which it did not — this alleged fraud as to the water bill would not change the overall result if a new trial were granted due to the numerous other issues,” Jackson wrote.

Lawsuit claims district withheld funding

The former employees are also alleging that Manatee sabotaged the school’s “funding allocations,” causing its financial woes and ultimately its downfall. During the four-day hearing last August, school leaders argued that Manatee undercut Lincoln Memorial’s share of federal money, and that district officials withheld the money for several months.

It was true that Lincoln Memorial’s approved Title I funds were less than its original estimate, which was made in error by the school district, according to past testimony by Elena Garcia, the director of federal programs and grants for the district. School officials were advised that estimates could change, she said, denying that Manatee withheld money.

“This suggestion that the reduced amount of Title I funds caused the downfall of LMA is both completely unreasonable and completely unsupported by any evidence or facts,” Cohen wrote in his final order.

“Neither Mr. Hundley nor anyone else at LMA has explained or even attempted to explain how LMA could prevent the serious and immediate danger posed to the health, safety, and welfare of its students by being unable to meet its financial obligations for its utilities, food, insurance, and salaries of its teachers by such a large amount.”

Hundley and other school officials were reluctant to speak during the hearing. He and the former chief financial officer, Cornelle Maxfield, continually invoked the Fifth Amendment in depositions, as a federal investigation loomed over their heads.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Inspector General was investigating the school and its former leaders, and the case was still ongoing as of December, according to a statement from the investigator’s office.

The new lawsuit was filed on behalf of all former employees and the affected families at Lincoln Memorial Academy, which was undermined from the very beginning, according to the complaint.

Ford, their attorney, believes the former employees were suspended, terminated or placed on leave after the district takeover because they continued to support Lincoln Memorial’s prior administration.

“The plaintiff has sustained severe emotional distress damages and loss of income, and is struggling to regain a financial footing within the labor market,” he concluded.

This story was originally published February 15, 2020 at 7:18 AM.