In fact the choices available for Haverhill are not great – amounting to either being governed from a long way away or being governed from even further away.
None of it will do anything to alleviate Haverhill's age-old problem of being on the edge of three counties, none of whom really want to know about the town's needs.
And it doesn't just affect Haverhill.
The whole A1307 problem has been created by the fact that it is a piece of infrastructure serving one major settlement, but built and maintained by a council from another area.
Suffolk and St Edmundsbury's answer to the awkward little problem of Haverhill was initially to ignore it and, when they couldn't go on doing that any more, to jump on the bandwagon of its economic potential.
It is probably a bit unfair to be hard on St Edmundsbury at the moment because it is pumping a lot of money into the town and has shown a real commitment to getting something done.
That was clear at the launch of Haverhill Enterprise's Focus On Haverhill initiative last week.
It was very impressive and the council and the business community are putting in some splendid work in moving the town forward.
But, as always at these sorts of events, when there is a lot of trumpeting, a lot of aspiration and a lot of positive stuff flying around, it is easy to forget that it isn't quite like that for everybody.
An outsider who knew nothing about Haverhill, and who, searching on the Internet for some information, viewed Haverhill Enterprise's scintillating new video and then happened on Adam Lord's 'Chaverhole' video might wonder if this was indeed the same place.
I'm not saying either is right or wrong, but they offer very different perspectives of the same community.
You may argue, quite rightly, one is the considered view of a large group of experienced, intelligent and committed community leaders, the other is the one-off view of a possibly misguided individual.
But you must also remember they are the providers in this equation while he is the provided-for, and everyday experience of provision is a very important viewpoint.
Just because a theatre has spent a fortune on the best actors and the best scenery, it doesn't mean the audience has to enjoy the show.
Also, amid the richly-deserved back-slapping, there was talk of infrastructure, meaning provision in Haverhill – cinema, restaurants, Tesco, better town centre shops and the north-western bypass.
But within a week of another tragedy wrecking the lives of a family living just a mile or two out of the town I just don't think we can go on saying that is a different issue because it happens to be the other side of a line on a map.
There was, I am glad to say, business presence from Cambridgeshire at the launch.
Business has long realised that this is Haverhill's future. But local government has been slow to follow.
There are behind-the-scenes discussions between councils and even cash from the Culina development to fund some road improvements, but there still seems to be no joined-up thinking about this road's place in the Haverhill jigsaw.
We're only just beginning to ask, for heaven's sake, whether Haverhill (or St Edmundsbury) should be part-funding whatever needs to be done – which may not need major engineering.
Whatever the allegations about the quality of driving on the A1307, the rising number of deaths corresponds to rising use of the road and that is mainly due to people going from Haverhill to Cambridge.
Success often comes at a price. Partnership has made Haverhill a huge success story, but it is time for some partnership in minimising the human cost.