Oakland Needs Leadership from its next Mayor

Written by Byron Williams

Tuesday, 29 June 2010

Oakland is now in the midst of a mayoral campaign.

There is always an aspect of any upcoming campaign that serves as a referendum on the previous four years.
If the notion of a referendum is taken to the extreme, especially if the previous four years were challenging, it could place voters in a reactionary posture by supporting the candidate who reminds them least of the previous administration.

It is common to hear these days Oakland needs leadership, but what exactly does that mean? Leadership is one of the words used often in our political discourse, but its definition depends greatly on the individual using the term.

Our collective desires for leadership will ring hollow if we do not define what it should look like in Oakland?
Here are my macro leadership qualifications for the city’s next mayor:

The next mayor must love Oakland more than the position.

I want a mayor who gives the impression that Oakland is his or her first priority. Being mayor is not 9-5; it is 24 hours, seven days per week.

That may not be fair, but it is the rules of engagement.

When a crisis occurs, it’s great that other elected officials are on the scene, but the mayor must be there; it is simply not optional.

There will be moments when the position of mayor is a thankless, frustrating enterprise that feels like one step forward and two steps backward, if one does not possess a love for the city that transcends the position it will be impossible to demonstrate the type of leadership Oakland needs in these challenging times.

The next mayor must have “I don’t know” “I got it wrong” and “I’m sorry” as part of their political expressions.

These statements reflect the requisite humility common to most definitions of leadership, but wane in our contemporary discourse.

Oakland does not need tinkering around the edges, it needs someone to roll up their sleeves and think outside the box. The downside, it will likely cause some mistakes.

Humility in failure can do more for the city’s morale than boasting in triumph.

John F. Kennedy’s approval rating was never higher than immediately following the Bay of Pigs fiasco that he approved. This is due in large measure by his willingness to publicly take full responsibility for its failure.

The next mayor must have an honest give and take with its local media

The media, in is multiple forms, is neither friend nor foe. We are certainly not a perfect lot, but to avoid us strongly suggest insecurity, a lack of preparation, and worst of all, the perception that one is unaccountable.
It cannot be a relationship based on avoiding tough questions.

One can temporarily get away with demonizing the “media” as if we’re a disgruntled group who has taken a blood oath to destroy the next mayor. But to consistently make that one’s policy sends the not so subtle message of cowardliness.

Leadership is perception; and developing an authentic relationship with the press is key to that perception. How often has avoiding the press served as a successful strategy to bolster the perception of one’s leadership?

One can state they are working night and day for the people of Oakland, but if those words are incongruent with the perception that’s cast—the perception will win out.

I want a mayor who exudes confidence.

It is impossible for the next mayor to demonstrate the aforementioned qualities without possessing confidence.
Confidence does not mean one possesses all the answers or they are beyond reproach. It does mean not only will one not shy away from being held accountable, but they welcome it—seeing it as the only way that transformation for the city can occur.

My leadership wish list is hardly exhaustive. But what I’ve offered is an all-or-nothing proposition because the criteria are intertwined.

Courage without humility is something more closely aligned with arrogance. And it becomes increasingly doubtful that an individual suffering from arrogance would welcome a people and a press that held them accountable.

Hopefully at least one candidate will emerge possessing the characteristics Oakland so desperately needs.
No one realistically expects the mayor to singlehandedly eradicate crime, improve schools, and jump-start the economy. But there is a shared expectation that we should be proud of the next person we elect to be the face of the city.