Commissioners deny state‑contract roofing proposal for St. Lucie County jail, direct staff to seek local bids

The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners voted on May 20 to deny using an Omnia/US Communities state contract vendor to replace the main roof at the county jail and directed staff to solicit local bids through the county procurement process.

Commissioners debated procurement method, local economic impact and urgency after county facilities staff reported a moisture scan found significant moisture in the jail roof and presented a vendor quote below the maximum price allowed under the state contract.

County facilities staff presented a vendor quote of $1,713,456 and noted the Omnia/US Communities contract would have allowed a higher charge of $2,124,390. Staff reported the vendor solicited subcontract proposals and lowered the price below the contract cap; the vendor named in the packet has performed other county roofing work and sometimes uses local subcontractors.

Commissioners pressing for local economic benefit objected that the vendor is based out of state and urged the county to put the project out to its own RFP process so local contractors could compete. Commissioner Matt Clasby said he would not support the state contract approval for an out‑of‑state contractor on a nearly $2 million job and moved to deny the proposal, citing the economic benefit of awarding large projects locally. Commissioner Townsend emphasized the facility's operational sensitivity and said he supported awarding the work immediately because earlier roofs done poorly had cost the county more; he supported proceeding with the state contract vendor.

Facilities staff said the quote in the agenda packet carried a 30‑day validity in writing, and staff described the job as time‑sensitive because the jail is a 24/7 occupied critical facility; a staff member estimated a 2–3 month timeline would be required to advertise and award a county RFP. County staff also identified three funding sources shown in the packet: general fund (001), fine and forfeiture (107) and county capital fund (316).

Commissioner Michelle Lowery and others urged a local procurement; Commissioner Coffey, who has prior experience managing county roofing contracts, also recommended denying the state contract and using the county process. At the end of the discussion the board voted on a motion to deny use of the state contract and to put the project out to bid.

Roll call on the motion to deny: Commissioner Townsend — No; Commissioner Lowery — Yes; Commissioner Lee — Yes; Commissioner Clasby — Yes; Chair Fowler — No. The motion carried 3–2, directing staff to pursue a local RFP or other procurement method consistent with county purchasing rules.

Clarifying details taken from the meeting record: staff reported a vendor quote of $1,713,456 (vendor would have been allowed $2,124,390 under the contract), the written quote indicated a 30‑day price validity in the agenda packet, and staff estimated a 2–3 month RFP timeline. A county staff member said the roof moisture currently appears encapsulated in the roofing assembly and has not yet penetrated interior building spaces; no mold testing had been performed as of the hearing.

Outcome and directions: the board denied the state‑contract award and directed staff to advertise the project under the county's competitive procurement process so local contractors can bid. Staff will return with the RFP and associated timeline and budget details to the board before awarding the contract.

Ending note: commissioners asked staff to include the jail roof project timeline and budget line items in forthcoming budget materials; staff said more detailed cost and contract information would be provided to the board as it prepares for the procurement.