Galt voters will decide this November whether two of the city's elected offices — city clerk and city treasurer — should become appointed positions instead, a change that would let the council appoint people to the roles rather than have voters elect them. The city treasurer post oversees roughly $168 million in city funds and investments, while the city clerk administers municipal elections and maintains the city's official legislative records, according to the City of Galt.
Measure L asks Galt voters whether the treasurer and clerk positions should shift from elected to appointed roles, per the City of Galt. Under current state law, candidates for those elected offices only need to be registered voters and residents of Galt — California law does not require any minimum professional education, training, or experience for city clerk candidates, nor professional experience in municipal finance, accounting, investments, or financial management for treasurer candidates, the city notes. If Measure L passes, both positions would become appointed, without the residency or voter-registration requirements that apply to elected officials.
How Galt Fills the Two Offices
The proposal would change the process for filling both offices, with appointments replacing elections if voters approve Measure L.
The city clerk's duties extend well beyond running elections — the office also publishes legal notices and helps ensure the city complies with the Brown Act, the California Public Records Act, the Political Reform Act, and the California Elections Code, per the city of Galt. The treasurer, meanwhile, monitors investments and cash flow and coordinates financial reporting.
State Law Sets the Ground Rules
California Government Code Sections 36508 and 36510 grant general law cities the authority to convert elected positions to appointed ones, allowing appointed officials to serve at the pleasure of the city council without residency or voter-registration requirements, according to Justia Law. By contrast, Government Code Section 36502 requires elected clerks and treasurers to reside and be registered voters in the city they serve, according to the Orange County Registrar of Voters.
The offices involve financial audits, open meetings, public records, elections, and government transparency.
Other Sacramento-Area Cities Already Appoint Both Roles
Galt would be following a well-worn path if voters approve the measure. Folsom, Elk Grove, Rancho Cordova, Sacramento, Citrus Heights, and Lodi all already appoint both their city clerk and city treasurer, according to the city of Galt, while Isleton continues to elect both positions. More than 80% of California cities appoint a city treasurer.
Voters elsewhere in California have considered similar proposals, according to Ballotpedia.
Even if Measure L passes, the change would not be immediate. It would generally take effect only after the current city treasurer and city clerk complete their existing terms in November 2028, unless one of the offices becomes vacant sooner, per the city of Galt. Galt residents would continue to elect their city council regardless of the outcome, and the council would remain accountable for appointing and overseeing whoever fills the treasurer and clerk roles going forward.
Part of a Larger Shift in How Galt Runs Elections
Measure L is not the only structural change on Galt's plate. The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2025-04 on March 27, 2025, shifting the city from at-large elections to district-based city council elections starting in November 2026, following a California Voting Rights Act challenge, according to the city of Galt. Together, the two changes mark a broader modernization of how the city selects and structures its local government.
For Galt voters, the choice on Measure L comes down to two paths: a yes vote would mean future city treasurers and city clerks are appointed once current terms expire, while a no vote would keep both positions elected under the current system. Either way, nothing changes for current officeholders — Measure L would not immediately remove or replace either one — and the underlying question, as the city frames it, is how Galt wants to fill positions responsible for city finances, elections, public records, and government transparency going forward.
