Raise the Hammer

Undustrial: "Yes, that's exactly what will solve this problem: LESS democracy. It's why amalgamation worked so well to curb sprawl and corruption, right?"

I don't think that

The Portland model as outlined has almost as many elected officials as Hamilton making charting the course of things (14 to our 16). Systemic reform is obviously not going to install virtuous characters in council chambers, but making it more competitive and expecting more of our officials, while also empowering them to make bold strides when they can find consensus, could be a positive change. (At the very least, it would make for more dramatic news rather than the juvenile spats and community cable theatrics we must currently endure.)

There are two chief virtues in this, as I see it. One is that planning and development is a full-time concern for a select group of elected officials. Another is that the officials on council are elected at large on a non-partisan basis, arguably reducing the odds of favouritism shaping the debate. I'm undecided as to whether rotating elections would be a good thing, but at least it would seem to keep everybody on their toes more often, since half of the representatives are always looking to produce campaignable results.

I would definitely take issue with the opposite idea (not one that you suggested), that instead of a leaner municipal government, that what Hamilton needs is a larger council, presumably one weighted toward a more just representation of the lower city. Adding wards would theoretically shift the voting balance toward the old city, overcoming the suburban headlock that has been in place since at least 2000's New City of Hamilton, if not before.

Compare as you like (I'm not sure if this means anything at all):

Mississauga (pop 668,540) = 1 mayor, 11 councillors
Hamilton/Burlington (CMA pop 692,911) = 2 mayors, 21 councillors

Vancouver = 1 mayor, 10 councillors
London = 1 mayor, 14 councillors
Calgary = 1 mayor, 14 aldermen
Ottawa = 1 mayor, 23 councillors
Toronto = 1 mayor, 44 councillors
New York City = 1 mayor, 46 councillors

Any of these cities has had to fight corruption and sprawl. I don't see that as a foregone conclusion of any given bureaucratic structure. It comes down to the individual, and I'd rather have half as many bright stars than the same amount of light from a room full of dim bulbs.

I guess the thing is that we're due for a system-wide review post-2010 election, so it's something we'll start to hear about this fall. It might make an interesting issue for pre-election debates, but it might prove unwieldy. Or the incumbents might just table it until after the election, like everything else.