Pete,
I see absolutely nothing wrong with people using different criteria when nominating or voting. I prefer it that way. While I do not necessarily agree with some of the criteria others use, it is their prerogative. Whatever their reasons for liking a chip that fits the basic requirement for nomination is OK with me.
Changing to a committee process would be going too far in the other direction because we stand a chance of many potential nominees being eliminated. The different criteria you cite as being used will not necessarily be eliminated by a committee process. What makes you think some of the committee members would not have those opinions, chipper friendly, valuable, etc.
The other side of that “chip” are those that will never support a chip from a certain area or casino. There are some that “hate” a particular casino, feel a casino issues too many chips, do not like the chip release policy, will only support a chip from their home region, will only support a chip that “fits” into their collection. These prejudices will not be eliminated by a committee process. In fact it would make it much more likely that those biases could impact the ‘OTY in a particular year.
I still want a wide open nomination process and vote by anyone that nominates. Let everyone have their own reason for nominating. That gets more potential winners into the mix and may even out some of the bias.
I am going to slightly modify the last sentence of your post to reflect my opinion.

I do not think that the club could ever come to a single criteria for ‘OTY and have it applied uniformly by the entire membership of a committee of more than one.
Paul