For years, I have championed home rule for local government.
It is important that as many decisions as possible be made as close to those that will be affected by their consequences. That is an essential reason to have municipalities. For example, zoning decisions regarding where businesses can be located should be determined within the locality. Municipal and county public works departments should oversee when streets are paved and how many parks are needed.
Is there an example of when local control contributes to a worse outcome than a better one? When does passing ordinances against something make government look silly and petty or, in our “don’t tread on me” society, seem hypocritical?
Anytime government restricts an activity it needs to do so with most of its citizens wanting the restriction. Passing a law to make a political point without regard to the practicality of either enforcement or consequences is the height of legislative irresponsibility. Yet doing exactly that is something that occurs quite regularly.
What brought this thought of local overreach to mind occurred at the last Stuart commission meeting. There was a second reading of a proposed ordinance on raising the age of purchasing vaping products to 21. This would match a county ordinance which did that earlier. The current state law is 18 for vaping and 21 for other tobacco products.
Let us forget the fairness of forbidding legal adults of 18-21 the ability to make their own choices regarding alcohol and nicotine. Do not mention that at 18 you can enlist in the military, vote, buy a house, or marry. Stuart has or have had police officers who are 20 years of age. They can carry a gun and have the ability and supposed judgement to make arrests yet are too immature to have a beer or a smoke. Put all that aside.
The City of Stuart and Martin County have made the determination that vaping will now be forbidden to that class of citizens. Is it overreach and an example of the nanny state and bad legislation? It is to me.
The second thing that occurred was a discussion of the enforcement of the use of single use plastics in city-owned property which is punishable by civil fines being imposed. If a meal is served in a Styrofoam clamshell at the greenmarket, the ordinance has been violated. Most of the discussion was how it was going to be enforced.
The city was prohibited by the state from banning plastic and Styrofoam by preemption. The only place such a ban can apply is on city property. The only product that could be banned for the entire city were plastic straws…and they did.
That was another topic of discussion at the commission meeting now that the grace period for fines is over. Martin County does not have a similar ordinance so you can use a plastic bag in their parks or at the beach. Stuart stands as an enclave in a sea of petroleum product detritus.
Should the use of single stream plastic and other such items be banned? I say yes if done by the state or better yet the feds. Several states have already done so. Florida has specifically preempted local governments from addressing the issue. But to think that a tiny municipality or county should do so while their bordering neighbors do not is unrealistic and will not accomplish very much. It will put an undue burden on our local businesses.
I predict that in this legislative session, the state will raise the age of purchasing vaping products to 21 and then preempt any local regulation much as they did with tobacco. I predict that the state will pass a bill preempting a locality from banning plastic straws. And finally, I predict that at some point in the next year, an enforcement action against some nonprofit for the use of plastics at an event in a Stuart park will result in the commission chamber being inundated by a mob of angry citizens. Then do not be surprised to see a repeal of that ordinance.
The problem with too many local elected officials is they forget why they exist. It is primarily to provide services that the private sector cannot or will not provide. Police, fire, water, parks, and roads are the important things. Whether a community should have high rise buildings, or 20-acre zoning should be local decisions.
When local government tries to monitor behaviors, it will be courting controversy. Just look at the problems Martin County has had with masks. Do I think that the state should stay out of things like zoning and what can go into front yards? I absolutely do.
Every level of government should stay in its own lane. Local governments that do overreach are just inviting preemption from the state. Each time the state uses preemption, it becomes easier for them to use it again.
