Currently, the city of Galt is being burdened with converting from an “At Large” Council to a “District Council” of elected officials.

“At Large” basically means electing several individuals by the city’s total electorate versus electing individuals within a district by the electorate within the district.

Upon reading, via the Galt Herald, I initially favored five districts for the City of Galt. However, during the Council meeting of Dec. 17, 2024, there was a discussion about having a specific number of districts. One option was to have four districts and a mayor at large, meaning having each district elects its representative, but the mayor would be elected by the total electorate.

This option was not acceptable to one member, fearing a strong mayor and others were noncommittal.

It is my understanding from experiences from other jurisdictions that the strength of a mayor is relative to the will of the people via their jurisdiction’s charter or by the elected representatives themselves in establishing guidelines for the mayor’s duties and responsibilities.

Following are my reasons for justifying an at-large mayor:

1. The mayor would represent the whole electorate and not a portion.

2. The mayor would not be burdened with maintaining and servicing two functions, as mayor and as a district representative.

3. The cost for a mayor at large would not be significantly different in comparison to that of a district representative.

4. The mayor would be a balancing factor in bringing representatives together in the decision-making process.

5. The power of the mayor is relative to what is given to the mayor by the will of the people through an electoral process, charter guidelines, or by the representatives themselves.

6. The mayor would be a neutral figure in a competitive environment.

7. The mayor would be the central spoke person that represents the people of the city of Galt.

Another observation, during the council meeting, was a comment made by a council member regarding District “would create division”. 

I am not in disagreement that perhaps staying as we are is by far the best. 

However, considering the state law and the significant cost of fighting the law, it would be cost effective to comply with the law and to move forward.  

Now, with that being said, a council elected “at large” and a Council elected by “district” both have elected individuals with egos, and both can have division as a shadow. 

Either they work together to be successful, or they become dysfunctional, as exampled by our current and past U. S. Congress(es). 

It is important to note that being elected by “District,” the elected representative serves a subunit of the whole but is still part of the whole. 

The challenge for the elected District representative(s) will be their view as to what is the betterment of the whole vs his/her subunit of the whole.

From my point of view and final comment, “division” is relative to one’s thoughts and can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.