Across America, mayors are reminding us that local leadership can have consequences far beyond city limits. From Minneapolis, where Mayor Jacob Frey has challenged federal intimidation and stood up for his residents, to New York, where Mayor Zohran Mamdani has made restoring accountability and public trust a central mission, city leaders are demonstrating that the fight for democracy, transparency and honest government doesn’t begin and end in Washington.
A mayor is more than the person who presides over City Council meetings. The mayor is also the public face of the community. A brand whose words, priorities, and political identity help shape how a city like mine, Poway, California is perceived both inside and outside its borders.
A mayoral election is about much more than municipal management. It’s about who gets to define the identity, priorities and aspirations of a community, and what they will do with the influence that comes with that responsibility.
That’s why choosing a mayor matters so much.
It is true that a mayor cannot tell a school board what curriculum to adopt, a county agency what policies to pursue, a nonprofit what to advocate for, or residents what they should believe. But a mayor has another kind of power: the ability to influence what becomes politically acceptable, what gains legitimacy, and what other institutions feel empowered to advance.
That influence doesn’t require formal authority. It comes from the signal sent by the city’s most visible elected leader about what the community should value, tolerate or embrace.
Consider a mayor who publicly embraces a MAHA-style, anti-vaccine worldview. That mayor cannot rewrite a school district’s vaccination requirements. But by lending the credibility of the mayor’s office to that worldview, they can make efforts to weaken those requirements seem more consistent with the community’s values. School-board members, parent groups and local advocates who share that position may feel emboldened to challenge established policies, believing they have greater political permission and public support.
In this scenario the mayor doesn’t change the rules. They help change the environment in which those rules are debated, and potentially change what other decision-makers believe they can get away with.
Likewise, if a mayor’s personal or political network is heavily intertwined with developers, major donors, or well-connected businesses, that can create permission for others to see access and influence as a normal part of how the city operates. Contrast that with a mayor who deliberately builds relationships across the broader community. Creating alliances with residents, neighborhood groups, nonprofits, schools, businesses and civic organizations. Those choices do not, by themselves, prove corruption or determine any particular policy outcome. But they do help establish who feels heard, who feels welcome at the table, and what people come to see as normal in the way their city operates.
To carry credibility it is also important that the mayor participates in the community’s institutions and lives within the infrastructure. For example, when a mayor’s family participates in the public-school system, the mayor has a direct, visible relationship with one of the city’s most important civic institutions. When the mayor homeschools or sends their kids to private school, that connection is absent. Not necessarily because homeschooling or private schools are inherently problematic, but because it changes the relationship between the mayor and the public infrastructure they represent.
This all matters because a city’s brand isn’t just a slogan. It is reinforced by the people who represent it and by the ecosystem of organizations, businesses, residents, and institutions that operate within it. The mayor helps establish the boundaries of what feels politically possible, culturally acceptable, and worth pursuing.
A mayoral election is not simply a choice about who can manage municipal government. It is also a choice about what a city’s most visible leader gives credibility to, what they give permission to, and ultimately what kind of city others are encouraged to help build.
For me personally, this brings the question back to Poway. I believe my community is ready for a new chapter, and would benefit from new leadership. That means thinking about more than who understands all the ordinances and legal nuances to manage City Hall. Those details can be studied and learned by most anyone. What we need to think about is the brand we want Poway to carry into the future, the institutions we want to strengthen, the values we want to project, and the kind of leadership that can give others permission to build alongside us.
That requires more than being a good administrator or even a good listener. It requires someone who can articulate a clear vision, communicate it with conviction, and create the kind of enthusiasm that makes people want to be part of something bigger than themselves. Someone who listens to different perspectives, recognizes opportunities for common ground, and knows how to build coalitions around a shared direction. The ability to bring people along, not simply tell them where to go, is what turns a vision into momentum and leadership into progress.
When none of the candidates inspires confidence, it’s tempting to treat the decision as a trade off between flawed personalities. But I’d separate the question into three essential attributes of leadership:
Values: What kind of community will this person legitimize and represent?
Competence: Can this person actually lead a city, build consensus, and get things done?
Influence: What will this person enable, normalize, reward, or discourage through the mayor’s office?
The question isn’t, Who is the perfect candidate? There may not be one. What we must decide is which candidate offers the strongest combination.
We aren’t just choosing who will occupy the mayor’s office. We’re choosing who gets to help define our cities’ futures, who can inspire people to believe in what’s possible, and who has the communication skills and coalition-building ability to make it happen. That’s a much bigger job than managing City Hall, and we should choose our mayors accordingly.
Stay educated. Think critically. Every vote matters.
