A straight white woman and a queer person of color walk into a City Council Race…

It’s not a joke. It’s what happens when people of color try to break the glass ceiling of politics.

As many of you know, one of our November 2020 City Council seats currently has two candidates running — Kat Mastrangelo and Rita Schenkelberg. This situation is a perfect example of the issues of race, class and age inherent in politics, that I believe are worth talking about. Especially if you are white and straight, this message is for us. This is a long post because the issues are complex, interconnected and multifaceted. I learn something new every day and these are simply my incomplete and imperfect thoughts in this moment.

For those of you who don’t know the background, Kat is a white woman, well into her professional career as the Executive Director of Volunteers in Medicine and married to a doctor. She is a well respected leader, has sat on multiple city committees, and is running partially on a DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) platform. She filed early and has been running a successful campaign for several months. Rita is a younger queer person of color, a mental health counselor, has no direct city experience, and rents a house on the east side of Bend. She filed recently and has quickly ramped up an effective grassroots campaign, raised an impressive amount of money and earned several important endorsements.

As far as I can tell, if elected, Rita would be the first person of color to ever serve on Bend City Council (15%+ of our population). She would also be the only renter on the council (41% of our population) and the only LGBTQ+ person on the Council (~5% of our population).

Many people are calling for one of them to drop out so that they don’t “split the vote.” (To be clear, these are nonpartisan positions, but endorsements and financial contributions usually make it clear which political party is supporting which candidates.)

The people calling for Rita to drop out are saying things like “she doesn’t have enough experience,” “she should be on a city committee first,” “Kat is more likely to win” and “we should elect the most qualified person, not just a person of color for the sake of running a person of color.”

People calling for Kat to drop out are saying things like “representation matters,” “It would be better to have a diverse candidate than a white candidate who supports diversity” and “white women need to step aside and let women of color lead.”

This scenario has happened before in Bend, and will happen again. For what it’s worth, here are a few of my thoughts on the situation. As background, I have been an elected school board member for 3 years and am currently chair of the Bend- La Pine school board. I have also been co-leading a national nonprofit called School Board Partners that works with aspiring anti-racist elected school board members from around the country, primarily leaders of color. So, I spend a lot of time thinking about and working with leaders nationally to work through these complex issues at the intersection of leadership and race.

I’d like to address two main topics that have come up in this race: representation and experience.

Quite simply, I have come to believe that representation in politics and leadership is critical.

I didn’t always feel this way. I spent 20 years working in schools and districts that were 95%+ kids of color with 95%+ white leaders. Guess how many times those white rooms talked about racism? Zero. Sure, we talked about diversity, equity and inclusion. But we never talked about our schools as institutions that perpetuated individual and systemic racism and oppression, despite the fact that we had huge racial disparities on every data point you could measure. Why? Because very few people in those rooms had ever experienced racism, nor did we prioritize really listening to BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and People of Color). So we had intellectual conversations about diversity and equity, but we lacked the righteous anger and knowledge that comes with lived experience. We had no business coming in as white saviors to “fix” schools and communities of color, especially without BIPOC voices at the decision-making tables. But I didn’t even notice. I believed in the myth of a meritocracy and that the best people would rise into leadership roles in spite of systemic racism, sexism, classism and heterosexism.

Fast forward to a few years ago when I co-founded School Board Partners (SBP), after a long journey in understanding my own white privilege and our country’s history of systemic racism. Thanks to conversations with several local activists, I came to understand that a group typically needs to be more than 50% BIPOC in order to overcome the natural state of the conversation being centered by the white dominant culture of our country. Therefore, SBP made the commitment that every meeting, panel and committee we had would be at least two-thirds BIPOC. I have been humbled to spend the last two years in rooms that are at least two-thirds BIPOC, and where the conversation and solutions are centered by the people who are directly impacted by racism and oppression in the United States.

Two things became quickly apparent. First, we were able to stop having awkward and slow conversations about writing equity statements and simply started doing the work to dismantle racism in school systems. Second, I realized how much quicker we would see change across the country with leaders of color at the table, making the decisions, instead of trying to advocate and organize to change the hearts and minds and priorities of the people at the table. (In fact, entire sectors of organizing and advocacy wouldn’t need to exist if they simply had representation at the table!) And although I’m talking specifically about people of color here, the same obviously applies to representation of people with disabilities, LGBTQ+ people, immigrants, and people from low-income communities.

Representation at decision-making tables changes the conversation. For example, if you have a City Council deciding what to prioritize in a transportation bond, and no one on the Council relies on public transportation, they are much less likely to prioritize public transportation in the bond. Or, if you have an elected body made up of primarily older men, they are much less likely to prioritize policies focused on child care or parental leave. If you have a School Board made up of primarily white people approving curriculum, they are much less likely to prioritize curriculum that is anti-racist and culturally responsive. The list goes on and on, and so much nuance will be missed by people who don’t have the lived experience of being poor or a person of color or a person with a disability.

There is currently no one on the Bend City Council who lives a life where they are on the receiving end of broken systems and their delivery — from applying for rental units to being a person of color and queer in a racist and homophobic world; who understand what it’s like to struggle NOW and to design more effective policy for our marginalized and silenced community members.

Sidebar — Are elected officials representative of their constituents?

Using School Boards as an example, they are not reflective of their student populations across the country. For example, nationally, 80% of school board members are white, whereas less than 50% of public school students are white. Nationally, 85% of school board members have a bachelor’s degree, while only 33% of United States adults do. Only 5% of school board members across the country are 40 years or younger and only 29% have children in school, and yet they primarily represent children and young families. 54% of school board members make more than $100,000 per year, while only 9% of United States adults do.

In Bend-La Pine, the same is true. Our School Board is currently 86% white, 100% heterosexual, 100% able-bodied, 100% speak English as our first language, and 100% are homeowners, just to name a few demographics and identities. Many of our students and families have backgrounds and experiences very different from ours, and their voices need to be at the table.

There are many systemic reasons why elected bodies are not representative of America. There are barriers in campaigning — money, networks, childcare, and who our society perceives to be leaders. There are even more barriers to serving, which is why elected officials in America tend towards being white, male, older, and wealthier. In order to be able to serve on an elected board, especially an unpaid one, you need access to time and money, childcare and flexibility, possibly translation, or other accommodations.

So, when we have a queer person of color who is willing to go up against all of those odds and run, we should support them!

And yes, that means white leaders like myself need to get out of the way when there is a candidate of color willing and able to run.

That brings me to the second topic… “experience.”

The most common argument I’ve heard against Rita is that she lacks experience and that Kat is better poised to beat an opponent. That Rita would be better off joining a committee first and getting more experience before running.

I think there are five things going on here: experience is subjective; experience is a privilege; unconscious racism, sexism and other -isms; confusion about the role of an elected official vs a chief executive; and a lack of clarity about transferable skills and experience to elected office.

First, experience is subjective, and what one person sees as important or relevant experience might be different from another person. In this situation, a more traditional white elite perspective might be that Kat’s experience as the CEO of a nonprofit is “better” than Rita’s experience as a mental health counselor. But who is to say that Rita’s experience as an OSU Cascades student and mental health counselor who deeply understands the struggles of Central Oregon community members is less valuable? Or that Rita’s experience as a community organizer is less relevant than Kat’s city committee experience? Does age = experience? Does climbing the corporate ladder = experience? If so, then we will systematically exclude younger candidates who bring diverse viewpoints to the table.

Second, it is a privilege to gain traditional “experience.” It is a privilege to get advanced degrees. It is a privilege to be able to spend the money and time going to networking events. It is a privilege to have the time, transportation and childcare to attend city council meetings or sit on unpaid city committees, when perhaps you are just trying to make ends meet. So, if we always require traditional experience, we will systematically exclude people and groups who have less access to gaining the experience in the first place.

Third, is unconscious racism and sexism, where women, and especially women of color, are perceived as being less experienced or less capable leaders than their white male counterparts. In addition, women are less likely to believe they are qualified to run in the first place, generally holding themselves to a higher standard before running for office.

Fourth, I believe people get confused thinking we’re electing people to manage the current system when we really need to elect people to govern in ways that change the system that isn’t working for people of color and people from low income backgrounds. Therefore, we don’t necessarily need candidates with the resume of a CEO. When systems are broken or in need of great repair, we need innovators and change agents to help build new ones.

Finally, I don’t think people really understand what makes someone effective in elected office.

So, what experience matters for elected office?

First, you have to understand that elected office is unlike any other leadership position. Being publicly elected and accountable to the community, while also being responsible for governance of the bureaucracy, is incredibly unique and difficult. Board members/City Councilors are not the CEO (i.e. Superintendent or City Manager) — they simply hire and evaluate the CEO — and should not be micromanaging the management of the organization. At the end of the day, an elected official is elected to represent the interests and needs of the community, and use their governance power to ensure that systems are working for the community.

In my experience, if you’re talking about transferable experience, these are the skills you might need to have in order to transfer well to elected office:

1. Have experience sitting on corporate governance board of a Fortune 500 company and managing/evaluating the CEO of that company
2. Have experience managing a $500 million+ budget
3. Have policy writing and policy making experience
4. Have significant experience with communications, PR and social media
5. Have significant experience with community engagement and organizing
6. Have experience working with/within the organization they are campaigning to lead

I don’t know very many elected officials with that resume, and even if you had that resume I’m not sure you’d be effective at changing the systems that need to be changed. In fact, the more successful you are in the existing system, the less likely you’re going to want to change it.

Again, I’ve worked closely with over 40 elected leaders over the past 2 years, over 85% of whom are BIPOC, and many of whom are under 35 years old and in their first elected position, and I have watched them kick-ass.

If I were to name the skills and attributes that make an elected official effective and impactful in leading change, I would say:

• Courageous
• Values-driven
• Has a growth mindset and is willing to learn
• Very good listener and takes the time to listen to diverse viewpoints
• Hard working and willing to put in the time
• Passionate and angry about the issues they want to impact
• Naturally influential and naturally able to get people to rally around a cause
• Not afraid to do the right thing, even if people don’t like you
• Not afraid to challenge the status quo
• Representative of the communities negatively impacted by the current systems

Given what I’ve seen, I think Rita has the perfect experience, and is exactly who is needed to be an effective representative for marginalized Central Oregon communities, and we should support her to be the strongest leader possible for our community.

Footnote: I’ve heard nothing but glowing things about Kat and believe we need more smart, empathetic, equity-focused white people like Kat to run. But if we don’t take every opportunity to prioritize leaders of color who are fighting for equity now, then 20 years from now our elected leaders won’t look or act any differently than they do now.

Post-script: In conversations with folx over the past few months, I’ve realized that some people believe I am advocating carte blanche for more POC in elected office. That is not the case. Simply having more melanin in your skin doesn’t automatically make you a better elected official than a white person. There are many specifics to each situation that need to be considered, and there are absolutely situations where it could be that “Kat” would be a better elected official than “Rita.” What I’m saying is that if we don’t challenge our assumptions and simply continue to define “more experienced” or “better” using the same white dominant culture values we always have, we’ll keep getting the same results we always have — a lack of meaningful representation in elected office.