Who does an elected official represent? It may seem like a rather straight forward question which should have a rather straight forward answer. But it certainly does not? Since taking office last year I have had to wrestle with the very essence of what “democratic representation” means. There is nothing simple to that rather complex political concept.
My main career has been as a commercial real estate broker. As such when involved in a deal I have always asked the question to whom do I represent and owe a fiduciary duty. Those of you who are real estate salespersons or brokers understand this concept well. In fact through the years the state has added mandatory disclosure forms that parties sign so that it is clear who a particular real estate licensee represents. That has been good training for my job as a commissioner. In the political sphere, each elected official needs to answer that very question.
There is no one answer for every situation because there are competing political interests. Is a businessperson with a retail establishment in the city though living in Palm City someone I represent as a commissioner? I don’t represent that person as a voter. It is part of my responsibility as a commissioner to listen to his/her complaint and act as an ombudsman if need be. If that person needs help I would make myself available to try and solve the problem if possible.
Even though that person cannot vote for me we need businesses in order to collect taxes and have a vibrant city. So I would consider it in the interest of Stuart to do my best for that business. When a business though is doing something that is generating complaints from residents, I would first try to mediate the problem. If it continued, I would consider it my duty to represent the people’s wishes that lived within the boundaries of Stuart as long as legal.
It becomes more difficult if one small segment of Stuart residents wish something that would not be in the interest of the entire city. In that case my duty would be to look after the well being of the entire city. Even if by doing so I would displease some of my constituents. I need to look to achieve the greater good.
What happens when the vast majority of my constituents are for something that I am not? Do I disregard the will and desire of the people and substitute my judgment instead? In cases where the people have made their desires known to me even if I don’t agree I would follow their wishes. In that case it has to be the vast majority and those wishes need to be lawful. I am not infallible and the collective wisdom is more often than not right.
If that collective opinion is in opposition to what I believe is moral and ethical then I would not side with the majority. I do think I first have to be true to my own code of conduct. The issue in that case is not a difference of opinion but rather one of belief. I could not possibly do anything other than follow my conscience. If people disagreed with my decision and it meant enough to them then they could oppose my re-election.
As you can see “democratic representation” is not a simple matter. Other elected officials may feel and act differently and it would not mean their ideas on the subject are incorrect. What I owe to you, my constituents, is my reasoning and thoughts on how I make decisions. Most votes I have in the past or will in the future cast have or will be non-controversial. You trust in my judgment to do what is best for the welfare of the city. In those votes that are more controversial you now know the basis of my decisions.