If citizens choose to elect an at-large mayor, which we support,
city officials are examining the right makeup for a realigned
map
– with four council districts – because it would allow the top
figurehead to maintain the same voting power as peers.
Since government boards must be odd-numbered, the city could
keep the same council districts and have the mayor’s voting powers
restricted
– or otherwise increase or decrease the number of council
districts.
At-large mayor would bring change
If citizens choose to elect an at-large mayor, which we support, city officials are examining the right makeup for a realigned map – with four council districts – because it would allow the top figurehead to maintain the same voting power as peers.
Since government boards must be odd-numbered, the city could keep the same council districts and have the mayor’s voting powers restricted – or otherwise increase or decrease the number of council districts.
But voting influence is necessary
We agree with the five-member makeup, and with having the mayor maintaining the same voting powers as other council members. If the mayor loses much of his or her voting influence – and perhaps acts as a meeting chairperson and tie-breaker on split votes – there would be less clarity of and less interest in the job.
We believe an at-large mayor is necessary to foster the kind of representative leadership, the kind of voice, this area needs as it continues to evolve.
If and when that happens, the four-district realignment should take place to ensure that our prospective, future leader has the character and influence to do the job right.
