Stuart awards $6.47 million Project Lift contract amid dispute over CDBG administrator

The City of Stuart on Aug. 11 approved a $6,474,356.85 contract to build the Project Lift vocational facility, but heated discussion and public comment focused on who will oversee the project’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.

City commissioners voted 4-1 to award Invitation to Bid No. 2025-102 to Procter Construction Company LLC of Vero Beach; Commissioner Reed voted no. The resolution (07-2025) was read into the record before debate.

The vote followed a series of motions and public comments. Commissioner Reed moved to approve the resolution “under the stipulation that Guardian or Patriot Response Group is not a part of this resolution.” That motion initially drew a second but the second was later withdrawn and no formal amendment excluding the named firms took effect. After additional discussion, Commissioner Clark moved to approve the resolution and the motion passed with Clark, Vice Mayor Collins, Commissioner Gioby and Mayor Campbell Rich voting yes and Reed voting no.

Why it matters: Project Lift is funded through a CDBG award and includes an outside contract to build a vocational training facility in Stuart. Commissioners and residents pressed staff on whether Guardian, the city’s CDBG administrator, and Patriot Response Group (previously removed from a separate historic‑church job) would receive city-administered funds or exercise construction oversight.

City Manager Mike Mortel told commissioners that Guardian’s role will be administrative, not construction: “Guardian is is only gonna be involved doing administration part with this grant, with this project. We have Kingly Horn that’s going to be overseeing the construction of the project.” Mortel also said the CDBG grant includes an administration fee and that “they’re gonna get 220,000 to administer the grant, which they’ve been helping us since 2021 till now.”

Commissioner Reed and public commenters said that is unacceptable given past problems on the Hamiltons’ historic‑church work. Reed said, “I just I I can’t sit here in good faith knowing that they’re going to benefit off a taxpayer money that work that they did. It’s it’s totally deplorable.” Resident Robin Cartwright, who addressed the commission during public comment, agreed that Guardian’s oversight of CDBG funds was not made clear in the agenda packet and criticized perceived mismanagement on earlier projects.

Staff and others pushed back that removing Guardian from its administrating contract would require a showing of contractual breach and a separate process. City Attorney Lee Baggett explained the procurement and contract framework and said a contract manager selected by RFP years earlier administers the CDBG program; she said termination would require evidence of breach and a formal review.

Florida Commerce staff, Mortel said, has told the city it plans to be “more involved” in oversight of the Hamiltons project and the Project Lift grant; Mortel said the state has increased funding for the church project during review and plans monthly progress meetings with city staff and the CDBG administrator.

What commissioners decided: After debate and public comment, the commission approved Resolution 07-2025 awarding the construction contract to Procter Construction Company LLC. An earlier attempt to amend the award to exclude Guardian and Patriot failed for lack of a sustained second; the record shows a separate, unsuccessful effort to remove Guardian from the project before the final vote.

Details and next steps: Mortel said Procter is the low, responsive bidder for the construction contract and that Project Lift will proceed with Procter as the contractor and Guardian handling the grant administration. He also said Kingly Horn (project oversight) will supervise the construction phase and that Florida Commerce will have increased involvement. The deadline for certain CDBG schedule items was discussed: staff noted a Sept. 1 timing pressure tied to grant requirements.

The controversy is likely to continue: commissioners and several residents urged additional oversight of Guardian’s administration and asked staff to document the administrator’s scope and fees. The commission’s vote allows construction to proceed under the awarded contract while leaving open separate administrative and contractual questions tied to prior work on the Hamiltons’ church.