LAST night, the 361st Mayor of the City of Worcester was elected. According to the Evening News' local authority reporter, all went safely through and David Clark was duly installed.

There was a flurry of controversy regarding the nomination of Cabinet Leader Robert Rowden as Deputy Mayor and the news that the Labour Leadership had changed, with David Barlow being replaced by Adrian Gregson. But where would local politics be without a bit of "argy-bargy"?

However, what was not touched on at any stage in this historic ceremony was the fact that this election in the city could, possibly, be the last.

As previously noted in this column, the county and district councils have just completed a long period of public consultation over the future, and fate, of local government.

This is at the behest of the national Government and it is now not an option. All the councils, apart from parish, have to reform into one of four basic models.

How the options have been received by those interested enough to participate in the consultation process remains to be seen, as the various councils will not be reporting the results and recommendations until next month.

The main options are: An elected Mayor supported by Cabinet: A Leader and Cabinet chosen by the elected councillors: An elected Mayor and appointed council "manager", supported by the councillors.

So what will this mean for Worcester? Well, the possibilities are numerous, but you could have the scenario of a full set of mayors (county and district) or you could have none at all. You could have two mayors of Worcester (political and civic). You could have things pretty well just as now.

So it's place your bets time. Our money is on status quo solutions, reinforcing the experimental models that are at present in place.

Whatever, we think there should be, and will be, a 362nd civic Mayor of Worcester. What do readers think?