Broward Schools approves $270,000 HANDY settlement after terminating lease
The Broward County School Board voted 7-2 Tuesday morning to approve a $270,000 settlement with HANDY, ending a contentious months-long legal dispute over a terminated $2.6 million lease.
The dispute stems from a five-year commercial lease agreement the board approved on June 17, 2025, with nonprofit HANDY, short for Helping Advance and Nurture the Development of Youth.
The initial agreement planned for the district to house about 75 facilities staff members in roughly 15,000 square feet of office space at 2102 N. Andrews Ave. in Fort Lauderdale.
Fourteen days later, the Florida Board of Education expanded the scope of “Schools of Hope,” allowing co-location in under-enrolled district schools.
This, coupled with a decade-long decline of about 38,000 students and funding decrease of about $90.5 million in the past year alone, the board voted on Nov. 4, to rescind the lease agreement after never occupying the space.
Formal notice of termination was given to HANDY the next day. The organization filed a lawsuit on Dec. 2, challengeing the board’s right to end the contract and seeking damages.
The settlement
Under the agreement approved, the total settlement amount is $355,525. HANDY is currently holding a $85,000 security deposit previously paid by the district, which will offset the total. That leaves $270,525 in new district funds to be paid.
The payment structure includes an initial lump sum of $228,025, followed by three monthly payments of roughly $14,166.67, according to Assistant General Counsel Kathelyn Jacques-Adams.
The district faces a projected budget shortfall for the 2025-26 school year that board members have cited at roughly $100 million. District data presented Feb. 4 estimates the gap closer to $92 million.
Dissent from two board members
“I have been against this from day one,” District 6 board member Adam Cervera, a litigation attorney by day, said at the Feb. 10 meeting. “I think this is an asinine amount of money that we are paying these folks on a contract that we properly terminated.”
Cervera said the district should have defended the decision in court despite the potential legal costs.
“This was one that I think the risk was worth the reward...” Cervera said. “We should have put our big boy pants on, on this one, let the legal process play out, because I’m very confident that if we would have litigated this to fruition, we would have got a defense verdict in this.”
He said the settlement may set a dangerous precedent.
“Approving something like this on what I deemed to be a very, very, very weak case is sending a terrible message to everybody that crossed paths with this district, that if you sue BCPS, we’re going to fold,” Cervera said. “You have to have a backbone in this world sometimes, and you have to defend your position, especially when you’re right.”
District 2 board member Rebecca Thompson, who represents Pembroke Pines, also voted against the settlement, echoing Cervera’s concerns. She said the case should serve as a warning to bring stronger contracts before the board in the future and that the district should not settle when it is in the right.
Supporters say it limits futher potential losses
Other board members said settling avoids legal expenses and uncertainty.
Jacques-Adams said the Office of General Counsel received direction from the board to pursue settlement within specific parameters and that the agreement falls within those.
District 1 board member Maura McCarthy Bulman said she supports the settlement because she does not want to “spend another dollar on it” and noted there is no guarantee the district would prevail at trial.
“I do think that given the very, very bad facts and circumstances surrounding this situation, by acting swiftly, the board has actually saved some money, and that’s the only way that I’m making myself feel better about it,” Bulman said.
She reiterated the general sentiment across all nine board members that she never wants to see another contract like this come before the board again.
Bulman also noted the district is actively in litigation and defending other lawsuits, and this particular case is different, noting she would love to have Cervera’s faith that they could win the case, but she wasn’t quite as confident.
“I think that in this particular situation, this is a self-inflicted wound,” she said. “This is something that we should not have been signing in the first place, and we made a mistake.”
Board Member Allen R. Zeman pointed out that the district never occupied the property and that the descriptions that are in the settlement’s agreement with HANDY are “overly optimistic.”
The Fiscal Year 2026 Educational Facilities Plan had included $510,000 for annual lease payments, of which $170,000 was expended through October 2025. The remaining $340,000 will fund the settlement agreement, resulting in fiscal year savings of $69,475 that will be returned to the capital reserve, according to the district’s settlement document.
“I hope that the reality that everybody has from this is different than the tone of this item,” Zeman said. “Because at the end of the day, the epitaph on this, the tombstone reads $545,000 of taxpayer money, zero days of occupancy for our staff.”
This story was originally published February 11, 2026 at 3:26 PM.
