The Yes group says a mayor will be more democratic because all us voters will be able to have our say on who is elected, as against the current system where a small group of councillors does it in secret.
The No group says a committee system is fundamentally more democratic than one person having so much power but would presumably still see a leader elected in secret.
Would both sides support a ballot of all voters to elect the new leader even if the No camp won and there was no mayor?
Candidates from the ruling party would put themselves forward, as they do now, only instead of a secret vote, we could all vote on which of them should be leader.
So, I say to the No group, would you support a directly elected leader if you win in the coming ballot?
And I say to the Yes group, if the purpose of the mayor is more democracy, would you support a directly-elected leader if you lose the coming ballot?
-Barry Hulyer, Round Hill Crescent, Brighton
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article