The management of places is no doubt improved with FTM becoming a bit more jurisdictionally aware, but we obviously agree that it has shortcomings, particularly because of its tie-in with an inadequate PNA.
There is nothing inherently wrong with GPS coordinates. The problem is only how they're used. There is no reason that they cannot be grouped into a set to define an area. The problem here is that the Places workspace in FTM isn't equipped to deal with that. Another shortcoming.
But let's get back to the matter at hand. If I were to make a suggestion for an enhancement that would accommodate a city without a county in the place hierarchy, how would *you* want that handled by FTM?