Two vendors presented competing school‑bus safety systems at the Charlotte County Public Schools workshop on Dec. 16, describing camera fleets, automated detection and evidence‑management services and answering extensive board questions about procurement, privacy and implementation.

Donnie Wolf, introduced himself as “the vice president of Bus Patrol,” and Steve Randazzo, chief growth officer, said the company operates stop‑arm enforcement on what he described as “about 42,000 school buses across 24 states,” and that roughly 5,000 of those buses are in Florida. Randazzo said Bus Patrol’s model includes free interior cameras for districts, no upfront costs for installation or maintenance, and a two‑stage human review plus law‑enforcement review before material is sent to prosecutors.

Board members focused quickly on how much operational control a vendor should have over the adjudication process. A board member (Speaker 9) said vendor involvement “doesn’t smell good” when the company helps administer hearings and schedule dockets. Randazzo responded: “Bus Patrol makes no decision about who is cited and who isn’t,” and said the company performs ministerial tasks—preparing evidence packages, scheduling and funding virtual hearings—and that an administrative law judge presides over decisions.

The presenters cited recent state law changes (including references to SB 462 and a procurement restriction described as Fla. Stat. 316.0077) that require districts to administer a local hearing process; Bus Patrol said it has arranged virtual hearings with the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) in some Florida counties and offered to fund that administrative work so the district would not incur costs. The company also said its program is “violator funded” and described a revenue‑share model for ticket payments; it quoted a hearing cost rate the district might otherwise pay as about $211 per hour.

Seon (presenting as Sayon/Safely), represented by Mike Hagan and Julian Humanis, outlined a cloud‑based video and evidence management platform with license‑plate recognition and predictive stop‑arm technology. Hagan emphasized auditability, chain‑of‑custody controls, SOC 2/ISO certifications and human review to limit false positives. Humanis described radar‑based child alerts intended to increase visibility and reduce incidents.

Board members asked whether interior cameras and live‑view capabilities would match the district’s existing systems; vendors said interior cameras are optional, can operate side‑by‑side with current hardware, and provide portal access for staff. A board member asked about termination costs if the district ended a contract early; vendors said terms vary but that early‑termination and reimbursement language is negotiated in contract drafts.

What’s next: staff will gather follow‑up information requested by board members, including sample contracts, integration details with the sheriff’s office and magistrate arrangements, and comparative cost/implementation timelines. Board members asked for more time to research and for the matter to return for further discussion ahead of any procurement decision.

Attribution: Quotes and attributions in this report come from presenters and board members who spoke during the Dec. 16 workshop and are drawn from the workshop transcript. The board’s next deliberations on the topic are expected at a future workshop.