Where are Martin County and the City of Stuart heading in 2016? I hope we will be more in alignment with common goals, but I would tend to doubt that. Unfortunately, on almost every issue that confronts the city, the county has a different point of view than the city. Much it has to do with the majority of the county commissioners not fully understanding the legal relationship between the two entities.

The majority of the county commission has the perception that we, at the city, are their subordinates. This could not be farther from reality. Not only is Stuart completely independent, but that independence is derived by a charter granted by the legislature. Any shared funding (such as sales tax revenue) is determined by state statute and is not within the fiat of the county commission to decide.

The county is a political arm of the state which has constitutional offices providing statutory services such as tax collection, voter registration, courts and legal records, property appraisal and the sheriff. Counties were created to allow state governing functions to occur closer to citizens. Counties were to provide a basic framework of government for unincorporated rural areas with few people. Municipalities were where the bulk of commerce was to take place and people were to live.

Unfortunately, what happened in Martin County (as in a few other counties) was an exponential increase in population without the formation of municipalities. This has led to the county providing municipal services to rural, suburban and urban areas regardless of the individual area’s need for such services. While Rio or the Martin Downs Blvd Corridor of Palm City may require a professional fire/rescue response, the ranches of the western county may need only a volunteer level of service. Yet, because of the urbanization of services, both receive the same level of response regardless of cost or need.

The entire urbanization of county government has resulted in some county commissioners feeling that they are in competition with Stuart. We actually are two different forms of governmental entities that should provide different services to our mutual constituents. The failure of some of the county commission to recognize this fact has led to friction between our two entities. From CRA expansion to annexation, the county’s attitude has resulted in resentment on both sides.

As an example the county commission requested a joint meeting with the city commission regarding the CRA expansion. Under the law, the county has no right to block the expansion, but they do have the right to present to the city how they would have used any increase in tax receipts if no expansion occurred. Instead, the county commission had their staff give a presentation that had nothing to do with anticipated use of those particular funds. They further showed a total disrespect for what was supposedly a joint meeting by allowing public comment on an issue that had nothing to do with the CRA expansion. It showed to me a complete lack of understanding of what their role is under our system.

Without this understanding of what the county’s responsibilities are as it pertains to municipalities, we will continue to have difficulties in 2016.  Each of us should be carrying out our respective duties for the betterment of our mutual constituents. Not all our county commissioners regard Stuart as an enemy. Some realize that Stuart can provide services more efficiently and inexpensively because of our urban density. An annexation or CRA expansion ultimately benefits the entire county. With this subset of county commissioners, we can work to benefit all in the county.  This is not a zero sum equation of I win you lose. Rather each entity has strengths that can add value without taking away from either the municipality or the unincorporated areas.