By a 69 percent to 31 percent margin, they approved Measure R, which cut membership on the nine-member council to seven starting in 2008.

Since it incorporated 99 years ago, Richmond has had a nine-member council -- one of the largest in California.

Measure R was originally intended in part as a way to reduce city staff costs, but proponents also said that having fewer elected officials would help create a less dysfunctional council. “There’s too many people to make decisions efficiently,” said Councilman Tom Butt. “It would save staff costs and the meetings would get done a lot quicker.”

Council members voted earlier this year to put the reduction measure on the ballot as part of a deal between the city and state lawmakers, who approved a loan for the cash-strapped city on the condition that local leaders consider eliminating council seats. Assemblywoman Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, whose district includes Richmond, sponsored the loan bill.

Most council members supported the measure, though the longest-serving member, Nat Bates, who was first elected in 1967, said he resented Hancock’s involvement in the city’s business. “She should not have done that,” Bates said. “It’s ill advised.”

Not so says Cindy Haden, who watches the council closely and sits on the Santa Fe Neighborhood Council.

“It’s a good idea,” she said of Measure R. “When you get so many people it’s hard to get a consensus…They’ll save a lot of time. We’ll have a lot less political aggrandizing we’ll have to listen to.”

Among California’s 478 cities, about nine out of 10 have five-member city councils. Typically, only larger cities have nine or more, but members of large city councils usually represent districts (Richmond’s council is elected at large). Los Angeles has 15 council seats. San Jose has 11, as does the San Francisco’s board of supervisors.

Although Measure R had no organized support or opposition, two council members, Jim Rogers and Mindell Penn, wrote the ballot argument in its favor. No opposing argument was filed, and no campaign committees were formed on either side.

Shortly before the election, some council members who supported putting the measure on the ballot weren’t sure how they’d vote on Election Day.

“I’ve always been kind of ambivalent about it,” said Councilwoman Maria Viramontes. “I voted to put it on the ballot and let the people decide.”

While it might be easier to run council meetings with two fewer members on the dais, she said, the reduction probably wouldn’t save the city a much money -- around $24,000, she guessed.

Viramontes also said that cutting seats would make it harder to find enough council members to sit on local and regional boards and commissions that oversee agencies that provide services such as water, transportation, and sewage. Remaining members would also have to fill seats on more agency boards. “It would be hard to get appointments to all of them,” she said. “Who can take off work for all those meetings?”