Laserfiche WebLink
I Redwood City is highly diverse. More council members = more ideas. The marginal cost negligible. <br />Neutral/don't know: <br />+z 3 No clue. Probably doesn't matter in the big picture. Hard to know what extra value comes <br />from 7 vs 5. <br />+7 3. I'm not really familiar with how other city councils run and function. While I want the city to <br />save money I'm not sure how much saving that will actually provide. <br />+7 3. This is a nonissue. <br />+t 3 it depends on: adjusted for population size and whether it truly is representative of the <br />socioeconomic diversity of our city. It is a commonly held perception that despite the number of <br />council members and number of ways the citizens communicate their opinions and desires to the <br />council that the council most commonly does what the council wants and often not what the <br />citizens say they want <br />+1 3 redwood city is growing not sure reducing members would be beneficial <br />R 3 Diversity is good. And yet we could get that with more Voca and participation of more citizens <br />with more diverse backgrounds, too. At a fraction of the cost. The advocacy "pro RWC" argument is <br />probably overrated. If we had better collaboration among the regional communities I bet we could <br />have better outcomes in air quality, affordable housing, transit, schools, affordable healthcare. <br />+t 3. I'm ambivalent on this one. With district elections finally here, and, depending on who is <br />elected we may have some new ideas heard on the council with 7. Reducing by 2 could save <br />-60k/yr in salary and benefits plus staff support cost which could be used for other budget <br />purposes. <br />3 its a drop in the bucket, city has more important things to put on the agenda <br />3, how much more expensive is it to have 7 as opposed to 5 ? <br />3: 1 think that 7 adds greater diversity. <br />3 - I don't have strong feelings either way. <br />