The problem with "one guy" is the potentially high standard deviation. The one guy can potentially be a careerist good old boy club protecting special interest facilitating jerk in the same way that any of the dozens of the barely accountable bureaucrats in your town can be.

▲

joenot443 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'd still prefer that "one guy" if the alternative is nothing. My Ontario town has a similar character. Lord knows he has his biases, but frequently the alternative to a loud curmudgeon is just no accountability at all.

	▲	potato3732842 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Accountability to whom and on what axis? My city's apparent "we're poor AF and can't in good conscience say yes to any boondoggle expenditure or no to anyone who wants to invest anything" soft policy is a Karen's nightmare.

▲

beezlebroxxxxxx 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If one guy can make it, then another guy could probably too. That's how cities used to have sometimes 3 or 4 competing papers.