Stuart, Fla. — City commissioners discussed a request from Martin County for a letter of support for a grant application tied to a proposed Brightline station, but no new commitment was made after a motion to provide a letter was withdrawn.

The county sent a January 7 letter asking the City of Stuart to provide a letter of support for the county’s grant application for a downtown rail station. The county’s letter warned that a refusal would be a breach of section 6 of an interlocal agreement between the county and the city and “may” prompt legal action, language several commissioners described during the meeting as a threat of lawsuit.

Commissioners raised several legal and policy questions. Vice Mayor Collins and Commissioner Gioby (spoke under the name on record) said the county’s move appeared to preempt prior negotiations and to change terms of the 2018/2023 agreements with Brightline. They argued the county had already altered the cost-sharing arrangements and that the current county grant filing did not reflect the interlocal agreement the city previously relied on.

City Manager Mike Mortel told commissioners the county asked for the city’s letter by Jan. 21 and that staff cannot respond to the county without a commission vote because responding would require a public-agenda action under Florida’s Sunshine laws. Mortel said the item could go on the Jan. 27 meeting agenda for a formal decision.

During public comment and an extended commission exchange, at least one commission member moved to supply the letter of support but later withdrew the motion amid objections about procedure and the underlying interlocal agreement. A formal vote to provide the requested letter did not take place; the motion was explicitly withdrawn from the record.

Commissioners discussed alternatives including amending the interlocal agreement, rescinding disputed performance obligations, or leaving the matter to be taken up later with a full agenda and public notice. Commissioner Gioby recommended placing an agenda item returning the interlocal-agreement options and any letter request on the Jan. 27 agenda.

The commission also discussed the broader planning context: the project’s appearance in the Martin County MPO long-range plan and references to the county comprehensive plan and shared fiscal obligations. Several commissioners said they were open to a county-funded grant application in principle but not if it changed previously agreed cost-sharing or land conveyance terms.

Ending — The commission concluded the meeting without producing the requested letter. City staff said they would place the county’s request on a future agenda if the commission directs it; absent that formal agenda item no city action can be taken.