James Ragland has an interesting column in today’s paper about the search for the next Dallas city manager. The online headline: “Is It Possible that Dallas Already Has a ‘Dak Prescott’ to Run City Hall?” I have some problems with it. Starting near the top:
“No matter who’s perched on top, the city manager in Dallas is like a big-league quarterback who doesn’t get to call his or her own plays.”
Given the headline, I assume we’re talking NFL in this analogy. I don’t think any NFL quarterbacks call their own plays. They might audible from one play to another, but that’s the extent of it. Also, there has never been a female quarterback in the NFL or in any big league.
“City Hall’s QB has to be a ‘system’ guy, someone who can thread the line in a council-manager form of government that spreads the power around.”
Lines are toed, or they are walked. Needles are threaded. But I’m glad that Ragland realizes that City Hall’s QB can’t be a ‘system’ gal.
“Reality check: Dallas doesn’t have a strong mayor on paper — and by ‘paper,’ I mean the city charter that no one takes time to read.
“But really, since Mike Rawlings was elected back in 2011, the former CEO of Pizza Hut has been the driving force at City Hall. In some ways, he’s rewritten the playbook.”
His analogy is broken, but Ragland refuses to give up on it. He’s the sort of columnist who gives 110 percent. Got it. Rawlings rewrote the playbook. So he’s the coach.
“Will Dallas break the mold and hire someone from the outside?
“Or will it stick to tradition and pick the lone internal candidate, Assistant City Manager Mark McDaniel, who has already mapped out his first 100 days in office?
“If you’re a conspiracy theorist — or really, just a student of Dallas politics — you probably think you’ve got this thing figured out.”
Which is it? Because “conspiracy theorist” carries pejorative overtones. They see things that don’t exist. They are usually wrong. A “student,” on the other hand, is someone who pays attention and does homework.
“You think the hunt for the next city manager is just a big charade. And that list of five candidates the mayor released Tuesday — the one with McDaniel on it — is merely a smokescreen to suggest Dallas left no stone unturned in its bid to find the best chief executive in the country, right?
“Even if you’re wrong — about the conspiracy, that is — you still may be right about the outcome.
“Shortly after the short list was unveiled, D Magazine editor Tim Rogers put up this post: “Meet the Next City Manager of Dallas: Mark McDaniel.”
“ ‘He’s an insider-y outsider,’ Rogers wrote. ‘He’s a really nice guy. He runs every morning at White Rock Lake. I told you back in September that this would happen. Odds he’ll be hired: bet the house.’ ”
Ah, I’m the conspiracy theorist. And Ragland is the student. Because, as he says earlier in the column, “Guess I’ve been around too long and seen too many [city managers] come and go.” So I’m wrong, and Ragland is right, and we both agree that McDaniel will be our next city manager. Do I understand this correctly? Did Ragland twist himself in knots like this simply because I predicted a McDaniel hire before he did, so even though he agreed with me, he had to find a different take? He continues:
“I wouldn’t call Vegas just yet. Not with some council members openly calling for a change agent or fresh blood at City Hall.”
Oh. I totally misunderstood. I’m wrong. It won’t be McDaniel, because the student knows that some council members won’t hire an insider. Next sentence:
“But if history carries any weight, the job certainly looks like McDaniel’s to lose.”
Nope. Sorry. I misunderstood my misunderstanding. Turns out, I’m right. Again.
“McDaniel, a former city manager in Tyler, made it clear back in May when he was gunning for the McKinney city manager’s job that he didn’t want to play second fiddle for the rest of his career. (You’ve got to like a guy with a little fire in his belly.)
“It’s worth noting that several council members made a point of saying back then that losing McDaniel, the new point man on the Trinity River development project, would be a huge blow. And then, the waters parted for McDaniel when Dallas City Manager A.C. Gonzalez announced that same month that he planned to retire in January.”
Some council members don’t want to hire him. But several council members do. Because he is Moses. Mark McDaniel is football Moses.
“Conspiracies aside, what Dallas needs now is a skilled executive with a vision, an eye for details and enough swagger to work with a forceful mayor and a City Council that often has a mind of its own.
“Or, as Deputy Mayor Erik Wilson put it, ‘We’re looking for the Dak Prescott of the city manager world.’ ”
I’m not sure Ragland watches football. The Dak Prescott of the city manager world would be a young person at a small city that has been overlooked repeatedly — like, for four rounds — but will turn out to be the best city manager in the country. That actually would not be McDaniel, who already works at City Hall and who — with apologies — is not young. Ragland wraps it up:
“Keep an eye on McDaniel.
“If he starts showing up in a No. 4 jersey, you may want to raise your ante.”
If I’m not mistaken, that’s an attempt at humor. But it’s hard to tell.
Bottom line: despite the foregoing, Ragland is better sourced than I am on this topic. Even if he doesn’t say it elegantly, he does know what he’s talking about. And he agrees with me. So I’ll say it again: McDaniel. Bet the house.
