https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw9gaEiQAxY
people should be paid to work to a product under some direction, if you want some professional outcome
teams where people come and go rarely have built solid products
Take for example the Linux kernel, Alan Cox has been working on it non-stop from 1991 to 2009, and even after resigning as TTY maintainer, he was still heavily involved up to 2014
From 1999 to 2009 he was employed by RedHat and after That by Intel until 2013
I can't honestly say he did RedHat or Intel interests more than he did Linux community as a whole interests
He's a big advocate and activist for free software, but he also said "Yearn for the good old days when you knew every contributor by name and the source code fitted on a single floppy disc ?"
In a way or another, a small group of "directors" is always better for the good of both the product and the users
The issue here seems to be primarily one of trust. I can relate to that, as I don't like Google either, and actually mostly avoided Go for exactly that reason until I got hired as a Go developer a few years ago. I found that the Go project in particular is developed and managed in a fairly reasonable way; certainly much better than some other popular Google projects such as Android (the open parts of it anyway) or Chromium.
In other words, I think you should give them a chance, rather than immediately go "corporate Google overlords".