Bainbridge School District Faces Second Federal Lawsuit as Former Employee Demands $5 Million
The Bainbridge Island School District is facing mounting legal challenges this year. Just as the district grapples with a high-profile federal civil rights lawsuit alleging administrators ignored a toxic culture of abuse by a former teacher, a second federal lawsuit has been filed by a former employee alleging wrongful termination and retaliation.
The newest complaint, filed on March 10, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, was brought by Jacob Freimark, a former classified para-educator representing himself.
Freimark is suing the district, Superintendent Amii Thompson, Special Education Director Annalisa Sanchez, and several school board members, seeking roughly $5 million in damages.
Allegations of Retaliation
In his filings, Freimark alleges that his December 2025 termination was pretextual and that he was actually fired in retaliation for speaking out as a citizen on matters of student safety and policy compliance.
He claims that following a supervisory change in September 2025, the district imposed strict communication restrictions on him—specifically a Letter of Direction banning him from using a personal cell phone during work hours.
Freimark argues these restrictions hindered his ability to document student incidents and contact emergency services while supervising students off-campus, creating an “engineered impossibility” to perform his duties.
District Cites Performance Concerns
Court documents and internal district communications attached to Freimark’s complaint outline a differing narrative regarding his dismissal.
According to a November 2025 termination letter from Director of Student Services Annalisa Sanchez, Freimark was fired for “actions and inactions related to the performance of your job duties.”
The letter stated that the district had documented “multiple issues... that repeated and were fundamental to your position, such as providing consistent support to the students assigned to you.”
Exhibits in the lawsuit indicate that district supervisors raised concerns about Freimark wandering, appearing unfocused, and leaving a student unsupervised, which required another adult to intervene.
He was also cited for disciplinary action regarding the “use of a personal cell phone during instructional time.”
Disputed Policies and Practices
Freimark’s lawsuit actively contests these disciplinary grounds.
Regarding the allegations of wandering or leaving students, he asserts that his duties included “educating students on social cues” and that his approach was intended to foster student independence rather than neglect.
Furthermore, Freimark argues the district misapplied its own electronic device policy to discipline him, claiming the cell phone he used did not technically meet the definition of a “personal” device because it was legally owned and billed under his parents’ family plan, rather than in his own name.
Freimark also alleges that the district selectively enforced this policy, claiming other para-educators used their devices without facing similar discipline.
Case Status
The case, assigned to District Judge Benjamin H. Settle, is currently in its early stages.