The 1895 Church of StuArt

From: Olga&Robert W. Hamilton, Jr
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 at 4:15 PM
To: Mortell, Michael, Eula Clarke,Rich, Campbell, Mark Brechbill, Giobbi, Laura, Reed, Sean,Collins, Christopher, Tom Campenni, Gandhi-Savdas, Pinal
Cc:Hatten, Louis, Pinkston, Jordan, Baggett, Lee
Subject: Re: The City of Stuart CDBG HR Program

Mr. Mortell,
Please pardon us, your statements sound more as you are not familiar with the City of Stuart CDBG Program, including all the documents, we, truly, don’t want to believe you are deliberately indifferent or even worse deliberately deceptive.

The City of Stuart CDBG Program is not a private enterprise by a private company. The federal funds are not awarded to private companies.

https://www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/assistance-for-governments-and-organizations/florida-small-cities-community-development-block-grant-program
Please, contact the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and/ or Florida Department of Commerce.

The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program is a federal program that provides funding for housing and community development activities. Congress created the program when it passed the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.
The program, which is administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), consists of two components:
1. Entitlement Program – funds are provided directly to urban communities, and
2. State Program – funds are allocated to the states for distribution to eligible non-entitlement communities
FloridaCommerce administers the State Program in Florida through the Small Cities CDBG Program. This is a competitive grant program that awards funds to units of local government in small urban and rural areas. FloridaCommerce receives between 18 and 26 million dollars annually from HUD to award subgrants to eligible units of local government. The program provides an excellent opportunity for communities to obtain funds for projects that they cannot otherwise afford. CDBG funds can also provide administrative support for local governments that may not have the staffing resources necessary to administer their projects.

Mr. Mortell, we have no idea where you get the notion from that we refuse to use the CDBG funds allocated to us to repair the exterior load-bearing walls, rough openings and frames damaged and destroyed by Patriot Response Group, and  installation of correct size windows, but definitely not from us. Of course, we will use the CDBG fund allocated to us, if any left, because, per your idea, Mr. Mortell, we should release the federal funds to the contractor for the incomplete roof without the roof ridge vent system being installed as it should be under the City of Stuart CDBG Program, and for the destructive and shoddy installation oversized windows against the Florida Building Code on Exiting Buildings.

Mr. Mortell, you have been notified several times about that the roof passed final inspection incomplete and the structural alterations to our building were done based on the misleading, incomplete, and incorrect permits applications, submitted to the City of Stuart Building Department by the contractor Patriot Response Group under the City of Stuart CDBG HR Program. Please see the City of Stuart CDBG HR Program Contract between us, the homeowners, and Patriot Response Group and also the CDBG Scope of Work Attached.   

The Attic Insulation and Impact Doors Installation are in the CDBG Scope of Work. Please, take your time to familiarize yourself with the attached files: the City of Stuart CDBG HR Program Contract between us, the homeowners, and Patriot Response Group and also the City of Stuart CDBG Scope of Work. 

The brief 5 mins in your office’s waiting area can be hardly called a meeting, and, probably, that’s where the confusion in your statements comes from. 

Also, please talk to Mrs. Gandhi-Savdas regarding how much funds have been allocated to each participants in the City of Stuart CDBG HR Program.

Mr. Mortell, all the impact windows are custom size windows. Who did tell you we got “standard” size windows? The windows on our CDBG project were negligently ordered 4″ larger than our rough openings. Our exterior load-bearing walls were altered by the contractor without any plans and permission by the Stuart Building Department and against the Florida Building Code, because the contractor didn’t notify the Stuart Building Department. Three windows couldn’t be installed  due to their size.

The contractor submitted the wrong floor plan to the Stuart Building Department. The contractor added an extra room to our building and altered the Means and Path of Egress. Mr. Mortell, if you are not familiar with the term and the codes on the Existing Buildings and Alterations, please, the building department officials most likely will guide you through.

Mr. Mortell, we do not ask the City of Stuart to modify “award,” all we have requested is re-inspections on Building Permits BP-24-684 and BP-24-653 due to the violations of the Florida Statues, Florida Building Code, and And the City of Stuart Code of Ordinances, Chapter 10 – Buildings and Building Regulations by Patriot Response Group under the City of Stuart CDBG HR program.  Please see the attached document

Mr. Mortell, your refusal to look into the violations we mentioned in our email dated September 9, 2024, and  familiarize yourself with the City of Stuart CDBG program documents we shared multiple times is truly concerning.

When the City of Stuart released the public notice “The City of Stuart received $750,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for the Housing Rehabilitation Program to renovate homes that need repairs and bring it to minimum standards,” the City didn’t mention Guardian CRM, Inc. received $750,000. The City of Stuart hired Guardian CRM Inc. as independent contractor to manage the CDBG Program, but it doesn’t release the City from the responsibilities and duties to supervise and monitor the CDBG HR program and the independent contractor to ensure the all applicable Federal, State and local laws are observed, the participants are not abused, and the CDBG federal funds are not spent on fraudulent, incomplete, and shoddy work.

Thank you.
Regards,
Olga Hamilton and Robert W. Hamilton, Jr.

---

On Friday, September 27, 2024 at 01:45:18 PM EDT, Mortell, Michael wrote:

I do not feel comfortable responding to all because I feel like this is getting dangerously close to a sunshine violation by discussing an agenda item in an email with all board members.  Therefore, I would ask that all board members please do not respond to this email.  If you have any questions, please just email me individually.  I don’t think the discussion is technically a violation of sunshine because it is not something the Board can vote on since the City of Stuart does not have the authority to resolve the issue between the Hamilton’s and Patriot or Guardian.  Further, I do not think that the City can get involved in this dispute because it appears to be a civil dispute between a private home owner and their contractor.  It does not matter where the funding came from.

NOTE: Mr. Mortell put his signature as the City Attorney on the contract between the City and Guardian CRM, Inc. Also, the CDBG HR Program contract between the homeowners and the contractor states: “21.4 Contractor Default. If the Contractor disregards laws, ordinances, rules, regulations or orders of any public body having jurisdiction; or if it disregards the authority of a City development official, agent or employee; or it otherwise violates any provisions of this Contract; then the City may, without prejudice to any other right or remedy, and after giving the Contractor and its surety seven (7) days written notice, terminate the services of the Contractor and…” We repeatedly notified the City of Stuart Building Department and the City Manager about violations of “laws, ordinances, rules, regulations” by the contractor. We requested the building permit re-inspections. The City Manager refuses to act.

The information I stated during the meeting was based upon the information given to me from Robert Hamilton.  Mr. Hamilton came to meet with me and we discussed his concerns about Guardian, Patriot and the City of Stuart.  I explained to him several times that we did not pick his contractor. 

NOTE: RESOLUTION NUMBER 11-2021 (a Procurement Policy designed to comply with the purchasing requirements set forth under 2 CFR 200 as well as Florida Statute Chapters 255 and 287 by the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity.)
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: MICHAEL J. MORTELL, ESQ. CITY ATTORNEY

RFP# 2020-103: CDBG. Contract with Guardian CRM, Inc.
PROJECT DEVLIVERY SERVICES
Meet with the Building Department, Purchasing Department, & other involved departments to coordinate bidding, permitting & inspections as needed for specific activities. ASSIST with finalizing the Scope of Work ( construction bid). Coordinate meetings with staff and contractors to review and sign construction contracts, related documents.
FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT
ASSIST with all Requests for Funds (RFF)
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: MICHAEL J. MORTELL, ESQ. CITY ATTORNEY

He also told me that Guardian offered to allow hm to pick the contractor of his choice and CDBG grant funds would be used to pay for the replacement windows. 

However, Mr. Hamilton explained that he did not want the CDBG program to pay for new windows because that money could be used to pay for his insulation and air conditioning that was above the total amount of the grant he received.  When I asked for clarification, he explained that the reason he chose the contractor the first time was because during their conversations, Patriot told him they would squeeze in additional work that wasn’t awarded in the grant such as AC and insulation. He explained that he felt like the first contractor had essentially told him that he would get a new roof, new windows, new insulation and a new air conditioning system.  It was his position that if Patriot did not get paid, then the balance of the funds would be available to pay for the AC and insulation.      Again, none of this was relevant to the City because the City did not have any authority to make those decisions.  I explained that several times.

NOTE:
Whether Mr. Mortell is not familiar with the documents, confused or he just saying whatever comes to his mind. The attic insulation is included in the CDBG Scope of Work. The City has been awarded $$750,000 (including temporary relocation as applicable) and is required to assist a minimum of 11 Households. (Governor Ron DeSantis, On July 12, 2021, in News Releases, by Staff) The average allocation per house is up to but not exceeding $80,000. The CDBG Bid on our project is $57,330. We would have enough funds left for A/C mini splits.

At the conclusion of my meeting with Mr. Hamilton,. it remained his position that the original bill submitted by Patriot should not be paid  and those funds would be sufficient to pay for his insulation and air conditioning.   I again explained that it was not a city decision and Guardian was likely making an economic decision to avoid litigation but it did not matter because the Hamilton’s did not qualify for enough money to pay for a new roof, new windows and the other improvements such as new air conditioning and insulation.  But, if he felt like he was entitled to those additional payments or improvements, he can speak to Guardian directly.

I do not have authority to tell Guardian or the Patriot Response Group what they should or should not do. 

NOTE: Guardian CRM, Inc. failed to coordinate adequate permitting & inspections on our project, and as a result the contractor submitted misleading permits’ applications. The CDBG Program Management (The City and Guardian CRM, Inc., according to the Contract) failed to respond to our complaints. Also, Guardian CRM, Inc. falsely stated that the contractor had plans and permission from the Building Department to alter our exterior load-bearing walls. But, Mr. Mortell ignores this.

The only purpose for my comments at the meeting was to inform the board that Guardian had been taking steps to rectify the problem.  I was just trying to illustrate that is not a City of Stuart decision. 

It is a Guardian decision or another agency that funds the Community Development Block Grant .  Clearly everyone involved is aware of all of the circumstances and the Guardian Group was offering to have the windows redone – I do not have any idea if any one acknowledged that there was any improper construction or how they came to the decision to authorize the hiring of a different contractor.  The City did not have authority to tell them what to do. 

NOTE: The City has authority, power, and duty to enforce the Federal, State, and local law and codes. But, again, the City Manager refuses to act. It looks like when it comes to the CDBG HR Program, a competitive grant program, the deliberate disregard of the law and deliberate indifference is the way to get scores and points with the State and U.S. HUD.

I can speculate and say they made an economic decision and decided it would be easier to remove windows that Mr. Hamilton doesn’t like and replace them without new ones rather than spending money  in litigation.  It is likely that they will use the first set of windows in a different project that has “standard” window sizes but again that is a Guardian decision. 

NOTE: That’s right, Mr. Mortell is expressing his speculations based on his lack of understanding of the CDBG Program or he just throws “whatever” at a wall. We haven’t received any offers from Guardian CRM, Inc. to have the windows redone. Mr. Mortell is also aware that the Windows Installation by Patriot Response Group didn’t pass the inspections. Awkward, Mr. Mortell suggest a litigation, instead of performing his duties as the City Manager: (a) See that the laws and ordinances are enforced (The City of Stuart Code of Ordinances)

I am not trying to write this email to offend the Hamilton’s in any way nor am I trying to offend Patriot or Guardian.  The purpose of this email is to acknowledge that the specific amounts I described could have easily been errors in my memory and as far as I was concerned were used as generalizations.  The City will continue to monitor and assist the parties with providing any records in our possession and we are willing to meet with them to answer any questions but the City does not have the authority to modify the award; to hire a different contractor; to decide that there is a winner or a loser; or to take sides and use the government as a weapon to force the other side to  come to any agreement.

Michael J. Mortell
City Manager
Stuart, FL  34994

NOTE: For heaven sake, we only asked for the building permits re-inspections based on the Florida Statues, Florida Building Code, and The City of Stuart Code of Ordinance violations by Patriot Response Group. But Mr. Mortell suggests we should pay for the incomplete roof with a fake roof ridge system and shoddy and destructive windows installation.

---

From: Gandhi-Savdas, Pinal
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 1:07 PM
To: Olga&Robert W. Hamilton, Jr ; Mortell, Michael ; Eula Clarke ; Rich, Campbell ; Mark Brechbill ; Giobbi, Laura ; Reed, Sean ; Collins, Christopher ; Tom Campenni
Cc: Hatten, Louis ; Pinkston, Jordan ; Baggett, Lee
Subject: RE: The City of Stuart CDBG HR Program

Hi Mr. Hamilton,

In reference to Mike Mortell’s statement at the CRA Meeting, I think he is referring to invoice payment in the amount of $24,650 (which is 85% of the actual cost) for the new windows installed by Patriot as provided in the attached contract dissolution.   As mentioned in previous email, Patriot has agreed to reduce the costs of the final payout by an additional $2,000.  That would reduce the final payout from $48,490 down to $46,490.    As mentioned in my email yesterday, we are working to reduce this further so we complete replacement of windows and roof ridge vent system, which  you provided quotes from contractors of your choice.

Thank you,
Pinal

---

From: Olga&Robert W. Hamilton, Jr
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 12:31 PM
To: Mortell, Michael, Eula Clarke,Rich, Campbell, Mark Brechbill, Giobbi, Laura, Reed, Sean,Collins, Christopher,Tom Campenni,Gandhi-Savdas, Pinal
Cc:Hatten, Louis, Pinkston, Jordan, Baggett, Lee
Subject: Re: The City of Stuart CDBG HR Program

Thank you, Mrs. Gandhi-Savdas.

Under the City of Stuart CDBG Program Contract with the Contractor Patriot Response Group, we request all the Certificate(s) evidencing the required insurance stated in the ARTICLE 11. Contractor’s Insurance.

11 .2 Certificate(s) evidencing the above-required insurance shall be filed with the Owner and the CDBG Program prior to issuance of the Notice of Commencement.

Please see the attached City of Stuart CDBG Program Contract with the Contractor Patriot Response Group

In response to the City Manager’s public statement at the last CRA meeting “So our building inspector goes out and inspects it, but it’s not related to the CDBG, Mr. Mortell signed the related to the CDBG Program resolutions, including RESOLUTION NUMBER 11-2021 (Procurement Policy), and the contracts with Guardian CRM, Inc. (RESOLUTION NUMBER 73-2020 and RESOLUTION NUMBER 45-2020) as the City Attorney.

(The City of Stuart Contract with Guardian CRM, Inc. RFP #2020-103)
PROJECT DELIVERY SERVICES
Meet with the Building Department, Purchasing Department, & other involved departments to coordinate bidding, permitting & inspections as needed for specific activities.

It is apparent that Guardian CRM, Inc. failed to coordinate permitting on our rehab site under the City of Stuart CDBG Program, as the building permits on our project were done in violation of the Florida Statutes and Florida Building Codes as we mentioned in our previous emails to the City Government, including the CRA and the Building Department.

In response to the City Manager’s public statement at the last CRA meeting “The homeowners don’t want the Guardian to spend the $27,000 on the new windows,” we, the homeowners never received the mentioned proposal from Guardian CRM, Inc. stating that the company agrees to pay $27,000 on the new windows. Please forward us the proposal. Moreover, the Guardian CRM, Inc has already admitted that the damage was done to our building.

(The City of Stuart Contract with Guardian CRM, Inc. RFP #2020-103)
Section 3. Guarantee
The Professional guarantees to repair, replace or otherwise make good to the satisfaction of the City any damage caused during the work. Contractor further guarantees the successful performance of the work for the service intended. If the City deems it inexpedient to require the Contractor to correct deficient or defective materials or labor, an equitable deduction from the contract price shall be made therefore or in the alternative the City may sue for damages, or both.
REGULAR COMPLIANCE MONITORING
Fraud prevention and monitoring.

Under “Fraud prevention and monitoring” by Guardian CRM, Inc., the City of Stuart Building Department passed the final inspection of the incomplete roof with a fake roof ridge vent system, but the City Manager, who is also a Florida Bar member and was notified about this, states “we cannot do reinspections.” Well, the City manager controls the Departments, hopefully, not the City Commission yet.

The City of Stuart CDBG Program is not a “private enterprise” because the City of Stuart entered into the contract with an Independent Contractor Guardian Community Resource Management, Inc. and delegated the CDBG Program management to the private company.

(The City of Stuart Contract with Guardian CRM, Inc. RFP #2020-103)
Section 7. City’s Obligations
7.1 Project Manager
The Project Manager for the City with the authority to act on the City’s behalf with respect to all aspects of the Project is: Pinal Gandhi-Savdas

The City Government can always contact the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and/ or Florida Department of Commerce and confirm the City’s duties and responsibilities regarding the CDBG Program Management, which go beyond getting ” the points and scores.” At least, the City should be familiar with all the documents related to the City of Stuart CDBG Program, including the contracts between the CDBG Program Participants and Contractors.

(The City of Stuart CDBG Program Contract between Robert Hamilton and Olga Hamilton, the “Owner(s)”, and Patriot Response Group, the “Contractor”)
ARTICLE 1.
The Project. The Contractor shall perform all the work and provide all labor, materials, equipment, tools, services and other items required by the Contract Documents for the rehabilitation of the above-described property according to the work write-up, plans and specifications (“Project”) provided by the City of Stuart Community Development Block Grant (“CDBG”) Program.

(Under the management and supervision of Guardian CRM, Inc., the CDBG Scope of Work was not submitted to the City of Stuart Building Department)

ARTICLE 3. 
3.2 Contract Sum and Payment. Progress payments are based on the payment schedule submitted by the Contractor and approved by the Owner and the CDBG Program.
3.3 Prior to the Contractor being entitled to any payment, the Contractor shall provide to the Owner and the CDBG Program (a) an affidavit identifying all subcontractorsor materialmen which have performed work on the Project up to the date of the payment request and (b) affidavits from each such subcontractor or materialman confirming payment in full and release of all lien rights over the subject property.
3.4 Payments may be withheld on account of any one of the following : (1) defective work not remedied ; (2) claims or liens filed ; (3) required inspections not passed by the local government building department; (4) required documents not submitted ; and (5) unsatisfactory performance by the Contractor.

ARTICLE 5. Supervision.
5.3 Work which does not conform to the Contract Documents shall be rejected by the Owner. The Owner may issue instructions to the Contractor through the CDBG Program staff, and apprise the staff of any changes, discrepancies or problems that may arise during the term of the Contract.

(The CDBG Program staff has been notified about the incomplete roof and damages caused by the oversized replacement windows installation in violation of the Florida Building Code, and the misleading permit applications in violation of the Florida Statutes, The CDBG Program documents, etc.)

We will list all the violations by the Contractor Patriot Response Group under the City of Stuart Community Development Block Grant (“CDBG”) Program.

We are looking forward  to resolving this issue.

Thank you,
Olga Hamilton and Robert W. Hamilton, Jr.

---

On Wednesday, September 25, 2024 at 12:00:13 PM EDT, Gandhi-Savdas, Pinal wrote:

Hi Mr. Hamilton,
As discussed today, I am doing my best to resolve this issue and work on reducing the final payment to Patriot.  We will review the budget for the CDBG Program and quotes provided by you for the window replacement and roof ridge vent system and at the same time comply with the CDBG program policy of not to exceed $80,000 for the project.  

Please give me about a week to get back to you on this matter and I hope we can come to a good solution.

Thank you.
Pinal

---

From: Olga&Robert W. Hamilton, Jr <roberthamiltonjr@aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2024 7:10 PM
To: Mortell, Michael; Eula Clarke ; Rich, Campbell; Mark Brechbill ; Giobbi, Laura; Reed, Sean ; Collins, Christopher; Tom Campenni; Gandhi-Savdas, Pinal
Cc: Hatten, Louis; Pinkston, Jordan
Subject: Re: The City of Stuart CDBG HR Program

Mrs. Gandhi-Savdas,

Honorable Mayor, City Council, City Manager, and CRA Board Members,

As per your request, we have attached a bid by Code Red Roof on the unsealing the roof ridge vent and installing the roof ridge vent system, and the letter from the owner of Liberty Impact Windows & Doors.

Due to the fraudulent and shoddy work by Patriot Response Group under management and supervision of Mr. Jenkins of Guardian Community Resource Management, Inc. our building sustained substantial damages. And we are also defrauded of the funds for the exterior doors and attic insulation which are included in the $57,330 bid.

Mr. Jenkins has been notified by email on August 4th, 2024, that the roof ridge vent wasn’t installed according to the scope of work. Anyway, Mr. Jenkins demands the release of federal grant funds (31 USC 3729: False claims).

Mr. Jenkins presents himself as a Director of Construction “certified in the latest building standards and codes.” Under Mr. Jenkins “certification” and supervision, in violation of the Florida Building Code on Existing Buildings, Means of Egress, and Path of Egress, Patriot Response Group,  destroyed not only our windows’ frames and rough openings but also altered the exterior load-bearing walls, and removed structural elements without notifying and submitting any plans to the City of Stuart Building Department.

In total, based on the Code Red Roof’s bid (now, they have to unseal the roof ridge vent by hand not to damage trusses and metal) and the estimates by Liberty Impact Windows & Doors we are facing $40,139 for the roof ridge vent system installation, repairs to our rough openings and frames, and installing the correct size windows.

The 17 unnecessary oversized replacement windows by Patriot Response Group cannot be installed back into the repaired rough openings and exterior load-bearing walls. Please see the PDF file with windows photographs and damages. 

CO#1: (100% complete-additional roof work needed to ensure roof safety and compliance): $2,500.00 is misrepresentation and has to be deducted from the final bill as well. Please see the PDF Roof file.

In total $42,639 has to be deducted from the total final bill. This sum doesn’t include expenses for repairing the stucco wall covering that protects our walls assembly, ripped-off Elastomeric paint, cleaning the attic and the fence.   

Regards,

Olga Hamilton and Robert W. Hamilton, Jr.

---

On Monday, September 9, 2024 at 01:04:27 PM EDT, Gandhi-Savdas, Pinal wrote:

Mr. Hamilton,
In response to incomplete work for the windows, we have agreed to install new windows (including framing as needed) to be completed utilizing project budget.  Guardian has requested for you to get three quotes from the contractors on your choice for new window installation.   Please provide the quotes so the work can proceed with new window installation. 
Also, Patriot has agreed to reduce the cost of the final payout by an additional $2,000.  Your project has $33,510 that can be utilized to finalize the new window installation. 
I understand your concerns with Patriot and we are aware of the issues.  At this time, we want to work with you to finish your windows with the remaining funding.   

Thank you,
Pinal

---

From: Olga&Robert W. Hamilton, Jr.
To: Mortell, Michael; Eula Clarke; Campbell Rich; Mark Brechbill; Laura Giobbi; Sean Reed; Christopher Collins; Tom Campenni; Jordan Pinkston; Pinal Gandhi-Savdas
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 at 11:57:01 AM EDT
Subject: Re: The City of Stuart CDBG HR Program

Dear Honorable Mayor, City Council, City Manager, CRA Administration and Members:
We, Robert W. Hamilton, Jr. and Olga Hamilton, applied for The City of Stuart CDBG Housing Rehabilitation Program, offered and advertised by on the City of Stuart website: “The City of Stuart is providing housing assistance to owner-occupied households through the CDBG program in order to complete a HUD national objective through the revitalization of conditions in low to moderate income areas.”

On March 13, 2024, at the City Hall, we signed the Subordinate Mortgage for the City CDBG Housing Rehabilitation loan, where the City is the “Lender” and we, Olga Hamilton and Robert W. Hamilton, Jr., the homeowners, are the “Borrower.” Our signatures on the Subordinate Mortgage were notarized in our presence by Dawn M. Cobb (Commission #HH 277782). Mrs. Cobb is also Guardian CRM, Inc. Admin. As we were led to believe, Guardian CRM, Inc. has been contracted by the City to manage the City CDBG HR program and supervise the contractors. Please see the attached Subordinate Mortgage.

On March 13, 2024,  at the City Hall, we also signed the Notice of Commencement (NofC) stating that the Lender/Mortgage Company is Stuart City Council c/o CDBG Program. Our signatures were notarized in our presence by Dawn M. Cobb (Commission #HH 277782).  Please see the attached Notice of Commencement.

The City of Stuart CDBG HR Program contractor Patriot Response Group under the management and supervision of Guardian, CRM, Inc. didn’t file the correct NofC dated March 13, 2024, with the Martin County Clerk and Comptroller, instead, the contractor filed the NofC that doesn’t state the Lender –  Stuart City Council c/o CDBG Program. The signature of Robert W. Hamilton, Jr. on the NofC filed by the contractor with the Martin County Clerk and Comptroller on April 1, 2024,  was notarized on March 28, 2024, without Mr. Hamilton, Jr., being present during the notarization. The public notary Barry Keith Hamilton (Commission #469619) also falsely stated that he knows Mr. Hamilton, Jr. personally. 
The public notary Barry Keith Hamilton (Commission #469619) violated The 2024 Florida Statutes, Title X, Chapter 117 (9), and the contractor filed this falsely notarized NofC with the Martin County Clerk and Comptroller and the City of Stuart Building Department. We have filed a complaint with the Governor’s Notary Section, and per recommendation by Martin County Clerk and Comptroller filed our report with the Stuart Police Department – Case# 2024-00024208, Officer Briglia #119.

Robert W. Hamilton, Jr had a meeting with the Stuart Building Department, inspecting the permit  BP-24-684 file, and per our request, the building department provided us electronically with all the documents submitted on the roof BP-24-684 by the contractor under management of Guardian CRM, Inc. 

Under the 2024 Florida Statutes, Title XL, Chapter  713.135, (7)(b)1,Building permit applications submitted to the authority electronically must contain the following additional statement in lieu of the requirement in paragraph (a) that a signed, sworn, and notarized signature of the owner or agent and the contractor be part of the owner’s affidavit: OWNER’S ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION STATEMENT: Under penalty of perjury, I declare that all the information contained in this building permit application is true and correct.

The contractor applied electronically for building permits BP-24-684 and  BP-24-653.  Per inspections of Building Permits BP-24-684 and  BP-24-653 files, provided to us by the City Building Department,  we didn’t locate any signed, sworn, and notarized affidavits, declaring that all the information contained in the building permit applications is true and correct. 

Under the 2024 Florida Statutes, Title XL, Chapter  713.135 (7)(a), in addition to any other information required by the authority issuing the permit, the building permit application must be in substantially the following form:  Mortgage Lender. Both building permits, BP-24-684 and BP-24-653, do not have Mortgage Lender: “Stuart City Council c/o CDBG Program” information.

The City of Stuart Building Department, CRA Agency, City Manager, City Commissioners, and Guardian CRM, Inc. have been notified by us prior that the Roof Permit BP-24-684 passed the final inspection based on a misleading, incomplete, and incorrect permit application as the contractor concealed the CDBG HR full scope of work from the City of Stuart Building Department, as we mentioned in the previous emails. Please see the attached file on the Roof with messages mentioning the roof ridge vent system and photographs.  

On July 16, 2024, the CDBG HR program manager and construction director Antonio Jenkins of Guardian CRM, Inc. assured us that the contractor Patriot Response Group had plans and permission to do structural alteration to our exterior walls. Please see the attached copy of the messages. After inspecting the Building Permit BP-24-653 file that was sent to us electronically by the Stuart Building Department per our request, we didn’t locate any plans approved and even not approved by the City Building Department or by the contractor’s engineer for structural alteration of our existing building load-bearing walls to install the oversized windows that required increasing the size of an existing opening and removal of structural supporting elements. The contractor Patriot Response Group under the management of Guardian CRM, Inc. also submitted the WRONG floor plan – PDF file “Hamilton Overhead Sketch.” The contractor added an extra room / square footage we don’t have and also altered the means of egress continuity.
According to the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 24 570.480 – .497, Regulations for State CDBG Program, § 570.486 Local government requirements, the local governments are required not only to encourage the citizens’ participation but also (7) Provide citizens the address, phone number, and times for submitting complaints and grievances, and provide timely written answers to written complaints and grievances, within 15 working days where practicable.

We reported the structural alterations and damages to our exterior walls due to the oversized windows installation to the City of Florida Building Department officials during the first inspection on Building Permit  BP-24-653 and on July 19, 2024 by email to Community Redevelopment Agency and Antonio Jenkins of Guardian, CRM., Inc. As we mentioned above, we were told the plans to alter our exterior load-bearing walls were provided by the contractor, but we couldn’t locate such plans. 

Why would the City Government refuse to act and do re-inspections, hiding behind the statement by the City Manager “We can not just go back and change the inspections” when the inspections were performed based on misleading and incomplete permits in the first place? 

The sentiment that the City Government has rested its responsibilities because the City has a contract/agreement with Guardian CRM, Inc. to manage the CDBG HR program, and the City of Stuart as the “Lender” of the CDBG HR federal funds is not responsible for ensuring that the CDBG HR program’s documentation and federal funds are not misused and misused by any party, including the grant management company Guardian CRM, Inc. is quite incomprehensible.

Why the Subordinate Mortgage for the City CDBG Housing Rehabilitation loan we signed wasn’t even filed and recorded with the  Martin County Clerk and Comptroller before the NofC?

The Position Summary of the City Manager states:
Under general direction of the City Commission incumbent directs and coordinates all phases of the general municipal government. Work involves the supervision of activities related to the City in accordance with the policies determined by the City Commission, City Charter and applicable laws and ordinances.

The Examples of Essential Functions of the City Manager includes:

2. Administers and supervises through subordinate department heads all functions, including but not limited to, law enforcement, fire rescue, public works, utilities, community redevelopment, financial operations and budgets, community and recreational activities, information technology, human resources, legislative affairs,
community development, city clerk, and other related functions.
3. Prepares the annual City balanced budget for submission to the City

11. Responsible for the overall direction, coordination, supervision, and evaluation of the departments and units under incumbent’s direction. Carries out supervisory responsibilities in accordance with the City’s policies and applicable law.

As it appears, the City Manager’s position is to “sweep under the carpet” the violations of the City of Stuart Code of Ordinances,  Article II. – Administration Of Florida Building Code by the CDBG HR program contractor under the management of Guardian CRM, Inc, and we are supposed to release the CDBG HR federal funds lent to us by the City  to pay for incomplete, shoddy and deceptive work by the contractor, performed under the misleading, incomplete, and incorrect permits, and we are supposed to use the CDBG HR federal funds to rehabilitate the damages and incomplete work done by the contractor under management of Guardian CRM, Inc. 

The damages were done under the permits submitted to the City of Stuart by the contractor Patriot Response Group under the management by Guardian CRM, Inc.

We ask the City to rectify the situation with the incomplete, incorrect, and misleading building permits BP-24-684 and  BP-24-653 approved by the City, and perform re-inspections on the facts that the CDBG HR full scope of work on the roof was not submitted to the Stuart Building Department, the roof ridge vent system installation wasn’t performed on the Building Permit  BP-24-684, and the alteration of our existing building load-bearing and removal of structural components by the contractor on the  Building Permit BP-24-653 was done by the contractor without any approved structural plans submitted to the Stuart Building Department. ( The 2024 Florida Statues, Title XXXIII, Chapter 553.79 (2)(a)1)
Not just to close but to leave the building permit BP-24-684 “hanging” with $19,090 Full Valuation for incomplete work is no less than perpetuating deceptive practices.

We are looking forward to the resolution and revaluation of the misleading permits, incomplete work, and damages inflicted on our house by the Contractor Patriot Response Group. 

Thank you! 
Regards,
Olga Hamilton and Robert W. Hamilton, Jr.

Article II. – Administration Of Florida Building Code^[2]
Chapter 10 – Buildings And Building Regulations^[1
Sec. 10-26. – Purpose.

The city enforces the state building code as required by state law. The purpose of this article is to provide for the administration of the state building code as amended by the city in this article.

Sec. 10-27. – Definitions.

Structural component means any part of a system, building or structure, loadbearing or nonloadbearing, which is integral to the structural integrity thereof, including, but not limited to, walls, partitions, columns, beams and girders.

Structural work or structural alteration means the installation or assembling of new structural components into a system, building or structure and includes any change, repair or replacement of any existing structural component of a system, building or structure.

Sec. 10-29. – Powers and duties of the building official.

(a)  Generally. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce the provisions of the state building code, as amended in this article. The building official shall have the authority to render interpretations of the state building code and to adopt policies and procedures in order to clarify the application of its provisions. Such interpretations, policies and procedures shall be in compliance with the intent and purpose of the state building code and shall not have the effect of waiving any of its requirements.

Sec. 10-36. – Violations and penalties.

Any person, firm, corporation or agent who fails to comply with any provision of the code, or who shall erect, construct, alter, install, demolish or move any structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, or has erected, constructed, altered, repaired, moved or demolished a building, structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, in violation of a detailed statement or drawing submitted and permitted thereunder, shall be guilty of a municipal ordinance violation. Each such person shall be considered guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which a violation of any of the provisions of the code is committed or continued. Upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punished within the limits as provided by law and local ordinance.

(2)  Violation of code provisions. The building official may revoke a permit upon determination that the construction, erection, alteration, repair, moving, demolition, installation, or replacement of the building, structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing systems for which the permit was issued, is in violation of, or not in conformity with, the provisions of the state building code.

---

On Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 08:13:53 AM EDT, Mortell, Michael wrote:

Mr. and Mrs. Hamilton,

The City appreciates the concerns you have raised regarding the CDBG program and more specifically the concerns related to your personal experience with the program.  Throughout the Covid outbreak and then following with the CDBG HR Program, the City, through the CRA served as the conduit to provide financial assistance to qualifying residents.  The Commission distributed millions of dollars during the Covid/ARPA programs and they also authorized the CRA to provide access to $750,000 dollars in assistance from the Community Redevelopment Block Grant Program.  In situations like yours, the City finds itself in a very complicated situation.  Essentially, the City of Stuart does not serve as the contractor or supervisor of the program.  As you know, the City does not set the criteria to qualify for the grants and more importantly, the City does not select the program administrators or the contractors.  I am sorry that you have had such a difficult experience with the grant and it is also my understanding that there have been attempts to rectify the issues with your windows.  Hopefully the entire matter will be corrected to your satisfaction. 

I want to be clear that Ms. Gandhi-Savdas is not taking a position on the services rendered because she is not allowed to take a position.  She is trying to get the documents signed and the balance paid so that a new contractor can be hired and focus on the solution to your issues.  I am hopeful that you can resolve the issues in the method that you have chosen.  All the CRA Director was doing was following the directions of the program administrators.  It appears that want to get they prior work signed off and get new work finished.  Then they can pursue any investigation they want against the prior contractor for the amount spent on the windows.  I do not know their position or even why they gave that instruction but I know that Ms. Gandhi Savdas is just trying to make sure you and your wife are satisfied.  Then there will be time for the program to investigate the issues and find a resolution.  Nobody wants you to have leaking windows or any other issues.

But, the City can not be used to force the contractor or project manager to take a different course of action because the City has already done the inspections.  I understand that you have pointed out deficiencies that you believe justify failing inspections but now that there is a full blown dispute, we can not just go back and change the inspections.  It is very complicated.  It seems to me that you would benefit from signing the document to all them to take the actions to replace your windows but I am not telling you what to do either.

When you send emails to all of the Commissioners, it creates a situation where the other side does not have an opportunity to provide their side of the story. Most importantly, the City Commission does not have the legal authority to vote and decide the outcome.  It appears to me that in order for you to pursue the method you are choosing to resolve the issue, it would require civil litigation.  If you sign the papers – even under protest – it will allow the program to replace your windows and then you can address the issues about the faulty installation without having to worry about additional water damage occurring because of leaks.

---

On Sep 4, 2024, at 11:40 AM, Olga&Robert W. Hamilton, Jr wrote:

Dear Mrs. Pinal Gandhi-Savdas,

We are not asserting the fraud, we are concerned about the potential fraud.  It appears there is a scheme to defraud the City of Stuart CDBG HR program and us, homeowners, while the city is the overseer of the program and the lender of the CDBG HR program funds. And the City provided “the security instrument” we signed to secure the City’s interests as a Lender.

Mr. Jenkins and you,  Mrs. Pinal Gandhi-Savdas, have already been notified that the Stuart Building Department passed the final inspection of the roof with a valuation of $19.090 based on the misleading and incomplete permit application by the contractor Patriot Response Group. Under the City of Stuart CDBG HR program, Patriot Response Group supervised by Guardian CRM, Inc., was solely responsible for providing all applications, permits, plans, drawings, product approvals, or other required local, state, or federal, documentation (to include all applicable Fees, A&E, etc). The contractor concealed from the Stuart Building Department the installation of the roof ridge vent system included in the CDBG HR full scope of work. The contractor violated the Stuart, Florida – Code of Ordinances Chapter 10 – BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS. Moreover, after sealing our existing roof ridge vent, the contractor deliberately faked “the roof ridge vent system” by placing the strip of mesh along the sealed roof ridge vent. The City of Stuart is aware of this fraud and has been provided with the photographs as well. We also preserved the communication with Guardian CRM, Inc. regarding the roof ridge vent. Now, we have a legitimate concern about how Guardian CRM, Inc. is involved in this potential fraud with the roof ridge system installation, and why the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Executive Director, representing the City, continues to insist on the full payment of the $19,090.

The City has also been notified about the dubious affidavit submitted by the contractor under the supervision and management of Guardian CRM, Inc. to the City of Stuart Building Department. As we stated, we, homeowners, were taking photographs and videos on May 22, 2024, and we never met or saw James Foster, Executive Vice President of Patriot Response Group on our property, moreover, on the roof. The affidavit is notarized by Vance Olvey, the authorized representative of the contractor to sign the contracts, “changes of orders,” and who also is the brother of the Patriot Response Group owner. How convenient!

Regarding the operational cost: the contractor didn’t submit to the City of Stuart Building Department any documentation on the roof ridge vent system installation according to the CDBG HR program scope of work. We submitted our request to the City of Stuart Building Department on the plans and drawings submitted by the contractor to alter our existing building’s exterior load-bearing walls and remove the structural components to install the oversized replacement windows, which didn’t fit our existing frames and rough openings.

The replacement windows didn’t pass the inspection by the Stuart Building Department, and the building department has never been denied any entrance. We would like to request a second inspection by the Stuart Building Department and submit to the Permit file the photographs of the first replacement windows installation that took place on July 5th through July 7th, resulting in the damages to our house, and the photographs of the reinstallation of all 17 windows, inflicting more damage. The three windows out of 20 couldn’t be installed at all due to the negligent measurements of our existing frames and rough openings. The reinstallation of the windows installed off-center by the contractor will require further destruction of our rough openings, compromising the exterior load-bearing walls.

We have no choice but to hire a structural engineer. Mr. Jenkins has already admitted on the record the damage has been done to our house. Now, we have to calculate how much it will cost to repair all the damages, including the continuous jack studs that supported our upper wall plate and were cut out and/or damaged by the contractor’s shoddy work to the point when the wall cavities are exposed and the wall insulation is sticking out.

$2,500 for the change of order #1 is also a concern. The contractor, Guardian CRM, Inc., and the building department were notified that the deck replacement and the waterproofing underlayment installation on May 22, 2024, failed, resulting in multiple roof leaks. The underlayment wrinkled and the seams were lifted. The photographs of the roof leaks, the failed underlayment, and the deck boards that weren’t replaced the first time were sent to Guardian CRM, Inc.

Guardian CRM, Inc. and the contractor charged an additional $2,500 to the program’s funds for the removal of the failed underlayment, the deck boards that weren’t replaced, and the second time installation of the waterproofing installation that took place only on June  21, 2024.  The preserved messages also show that the contractor planned to install the metal over the failed deck replacement and waterproofing underlayment installation.  While Guardian CRM, Inc. and the contractor took the photographs, we also have taken photographs and videos.

The comparison of the photos taken on two different dates shows how the contractor can potentially inflate the job to draw more money out of the federal funds.

Is $2,500  for the extra boards the contractor brought (we can calculate it) or does this charge also include payments for the same job the contractor performed on May 22, 2024? We kindly ask you to elaborate on “roof safety and compliance.”

The supposed independent engineer was not denied entrance to our house on July 26, 2024, either. The engineer declined to perform the inspection after Vance Olvey of Patriot Response Group stated that the contractor hired and paid the engineer. During a 35-minute phone conversation on July 25, 2024, Mr. Jenkins convinced us to sign the change of order and that the engineer would be independent, but Mr. Jenkins never mentioned the $1000 charged to our CDBG HR fund would be “reimbursed” to the contractor, and in combination with the change of order #1 it would make $3,500.  We still don’t know the name of the engineer. Mr. Jenkins couldn’t recall the engineer’s name at the last video-recorded CRM meeting at the City Hall. But our surveillance camera video on July 26, 2024, shows Vance Olvye of Patriot Response Group came earlier that day, waiting for the engineer, waving to the engineer, giving the documents to the engineer, chatting with the engineer, and he knew the engineer that Patriot Response Group hired. Mr. Jenkins did not call on that day or even after at least to ask us what happened.

We were left abandoned until we started to raise the issue via email on August 4, 2024. And what did  Mr. Jenkins do? Knowing that the roof passed inspection being incomplete because the contractor concealed the scope of work from the Building Department, Mr. Jenkins threatened us with liens on August 15th if we didn’t release the federal funds to pay the contractor, and an hour later after Mr. Jenkins’s email, a man called, stating he was the roofing subcontractor and he wasn’t paid. What a coincidence!

We have not received any apology from Mr. Jenkins of Guardian CRM, Inc. nor the contractor Patriot Response Group, only their threats of mechanical liens to extort payments from the program funds for their incomplete, shoddy, destructive work, and even potentially fraudulent work due to which we are in a much worse situation than we were before the CDBG HR program. And now, Dear Mrs. Pinal Gandhi-Savdas, you again asked us to release the funds.

There are not just cracks and holes left by the CDBG HR contractor in our house walls, it looks like there are cracks and holes in the Oversight of these programs and the federal funds are siphoned out.

Due to this situation and concerns, we, homeowners, are put in a position where we have to request an official investigation of this matter.

Regards,
Olga Hamilton and Robert W. Hamilton, Jr.

From: Gandhi-Savdas, Pinal
To: Olga&Robert W. Hamilton, Jr ; Mortell, Michael; Eula Clarke; Rich, Campbell; Mark Brechbill; Giobbi, Laura; Reed, Sean; Collins, Christopher; Tom Campenni
Cc: Hatten, Louis; Pinkston, Jordan
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 at 01:04:27 PM EDT
Subject: RE: The City of Stuart CDBG HR Program

Mr. Hamilton,

In response to incomplete work for the windows, we have agreed to install new windows (including framing as needed) to be completed utilizing project budget.  Guardian has requested for you to get three quotes from the contractors on your choice for new window installation.   Please provide the quotes so the work can proceed with new window installation. 

Also, Patriot has agreed to reduce the cost of the final payout by an additional $2,000.  Your project has $33,510 that can be utilized to finalize the new window installation. 

I understand your concerns with Patriot and we are aware of the issues.  At this time, we want to work with you to finish your windows with the remaining funding.   

Thank you,

Pinal

---

Note! Such a “brilliant” approach by the City Government to resolve the issue: We, the City of Stuart CDBG HR program participants should release the federal funds to pay Patriot Response Group for the incomplete roof with a “fake” roof ridge system, the oversized replacement windows shoddy installation that caused damage to our building under the Guardian CRM, Inc. and the City’s watch, approval, and deliberate indifference, and then use $33,510 to repair all the damage! So, our mortgage with the City CDBG HR Program would be $80,000 for the incomplete roof and the replacement windows! $33,510 is not even enough to repair all the windows’ frames and rough openings, including the restoration of the essential structural elements that Patriot Response Group cut out along with the alteration of the load-bearing walls, to repair the cracks and holes in the stucco wall coverings and ripped-off several coats of Elastomeric paint, and of course, no money left for the roof ridge vent system installation, the attic insulation, the exterior doors, according to the bid and scope of work. Oh, that feeling of nausea when you are kinda getting scammed by the City, so the City can report to the State of Florida and the U.S. HUD what a wonderful job the City has done with the CDBG HR funds and get their points and scores!

Below are a few photos of “the faulty installation” and “leaky windows” as the City Manager Mr. Mortell addressed “the issue.” Click on the image.