EVANS ON EVANS

When Jack Evans walks out of the mayor’s office for the last time May 2, it will be with pride, he says. But Evans’ pride in his accomplishments as mayor will be tempered by some regrets due to the frustrations of leading a city council that often seems to have 11 different leaders. Mayor Evans talked with D Magazine about his time in office and his hopes- and fears-for Dallas’ future.

D MAGAZINE: Can you give us some overall, general reflections about your term as mayor?

EVANS: I didn’t have any intention of seeking this job. I’ve always been interested in the city, and when a cross section of people asked me to run for mayor, it was something new in Dallas because most of the time the business community has selected the person to be the endorsed candidate of the establishment. But a group of people came to me, spearheaded by some neighborhood groups and minorities and also the business community. This gave me a lot of confidence. I’ve always been a ’people person, ’ being in the business community and serving people.

I became involved in community affairs because the company [the Cullum Companies, of which Evans is president] was oriented that way, toward giving back to the community. I had a little ordeal in 1978 [his kidnapping by extortionists], which caused me to think about staying out of a high-profile position, but I was able to overcome that when I was asked to head the 1979 bond campaign for the new museum of fine arts. We carried all seven propositions on the ballot, and this gave me a feeling of involvement.

When I was contacted to seek the office, I talked to my family, talked to the company and talked to my good friend Bob Folsom [Dallas mayor from 1976 to 1981]. He told me the pitfalls of the office -well, he told me some of them. You don’t know them all until you’re in office. Folsom told me I’d need the best city manager I could get and that George Schrader was that.

Well, immediately after I announced I would run for mayor, I learned that George Schrader didn’t want to continue as city manager. I had an inkling of this already, but I thought it would probably be two years down the road. So my challenge was to get the best city manager I could because I want us to keep the council-manager form of government for Dallas.

Chuck Anderson [now city manager] is a top-notch administrator and delegator. He was willing to step in and make some hard decisions. And he’s been great to work with. Chuck didn’t know the city and the people as I did, so I had the opportunity to open some doors for him.

I’m very pleased that I sought this office. I campaigned on the basis that I would be the mayor for all the people. I’ve learned that you can only satisfy some of the people some of the time, but I’ve had a lot of fulfillment.



D MAGAZINE: Is your decision not to seek a second term purely a business decision?

EVANS: Yes, it is. The regrettable part of this, of course, is losing Bob Cullum, the founder of the company [Cullum died in December 1981]. Then, the manager of one of our major divisions decided that he wanted to leave the Midwest and go back to his native state. And the manager of one of our newer divisions wanted to take early retirement. When all that happened, it caused me to make the decision not to seek a second term.

I regret this because I was really looking forward to another term. I think we’ve just found the right ingredients for being a very effective mayor’s office. This office is functioning very well with the city manager’s office; it’s like the chairman of the board and the president of the company. Our staffs are meshing well, and there’s a fulfilling challenge in this job. But I think the day has come when the mayor of Dallas must be a full-time mayor.



D MAGAZINE: Do you think that means we will have different kinds of people seeking the office – professional politicians rather than involved citizens interested in volunteering their time?

EVANS: Not really. I think Erik Jonsson [Dallas mayor from 1964 to 1971] was a good example. He had reached a plateau in his professional career and had an agreement with his company that he could spend whatever time was necessary for the mayor’s office. Of course, at the time that he was mayor, the office did not require the time that it requires now.

Following Erik Jonsson was Wes Wise, a very likable person, but he did not have his own business. He was working on salary and commission – mostly commission. A person has to learn a trade or be in business for himself in order to give the time to the city. I think the time is long past when a person can be mayor like Wise was, going out to do his job and then coming back to do city business.

Sure, we have a city manager, but the mayor’s job is still very demanding. Let me give you an example. We were trying to develop the Arts District, which was high on my list of priorities. We couldn’t get the land for the concert hall. Well, you couldn’t just expect the city manager to do that. I took it on myself to get involved with the Symphony Association. And now there’s the amphitheater [an arts facility in the works for Lake Ray Hubbard]. Sun Oil has made a decision that they do not want to fund it, so it’s incumbent upon the office to get another funding source. That’s going to take the mayor’s time. So will planning for the 1984 Republican Convention.



D MAGAZINE: So what are our choices? Some say that we must either increase the mayor’s salary or expect that only wealthy candidates will be able to seek the job.

EVANS: I think that’s our choice. Dallas is at a crossroads on this matter. I still think Dallas has enough citizens who can afford to be mayor full time and do the job the way it must be done. I thought I was in that position until our company lost Bob Cullum.

Sure, as Chuck Anderson grows in his responsibilities, you could get by with this being a ceremonial office, going out to cut the ribbons and open the conventions. But when it comes to building a city, your mayor needs to work with the planning commissions and work in concert with the city manager. And you’ve got all these various complex problems of eight single-member districts. I don’t even vote on a zoning case until I talk with the council member whose district is involved. And I want to get out there myself and drive the area.



D MAGAZINE: Do you think the council spends too much of its time on zoning cases?

EVANS: Yes, far too much. I want to give more responsibility to the City Planning Commission, so we’ll look at only the most controversial issues of zoning. We take so much time on the council doing the same thing that the City Planning Commission has already done. I don’t want us to abdicate, but I do think we need to delegate that responsibility to the commission. If we don’t have that much confidence in them, we’ve got the wrong planning commission. We’ve grown to the point that zoning cases could cause this council to meet twice a week instead of every other week, which we’re trying to get to.



D MAGAZINE: How have changes in Dallas caused the job of the mayor to change?

EVANS: Neighborhood groups – and we’re all members of neighborhoods -are now speaking with a stronger voice. And they’re better organized than they were even five years ago. You’ve got groups that are condo owners, and single-family dwellers who don’t want anything to encroach upon their neighborhoods. They want to protect the neighborhood, and they don’t want anything to change.

When you talk about taking mass transit through a neighborhood, that’s just something you would have done years ago. The interstate goes right through the home where we lived when I was a youngster. That home’s gone. Today, that doesn’t happen without a lot of opposition.

I think these neighborhood groups are all important to the decision-making process. I think they should be involved, but you’ve got to keep them informed.

This office has also changed because of our public affairs department. Before, we were at the mercy of the media. The media would come in on the spur of the moment and ask what we thought about Central Expressway or a bond issue. We were reacting in place of planning what we were going to do. We’re developing our public affairs department, and through it, the mayor or the city manager can go to the media and say, ’Here is our research and here is our position, ’ just like you would in business. It’s not going to get the headlines many times or the 10 o’clock news, but we’ve got a vehicle to communicate to the media, which we haven’t had in the past.



D MAGAZINE: How do you see the impact of single-member districts? Do you think they tend to be insular and not concerned with the welfare of the city as a whole?

EVANS: Some. That varies. I’ve seen this happen with about three of our districts. They’re more interested in what happens in that district than in the total picture. But fortunately, the majority of the council looks at the whole. If you evaluate the council members as individuals you can see that. I admire Lee Simpson [councilman from District 5] because he came in just looking at one neighborhood in East Dallas. But he’s grown so much. I see him now broadening his scope; he’s looking at all of Dallas now.

And there are some council members who take the job and their responsibilities more seriously than others. They’ll probe into issues. [The new ordinance for] historical preservation is a good example. The Mayor’s Task Force put this together, working with the Landmark Committee. How do we preserve the historical landmarks of Dallas, but not at the expense of the future development of the city? We’ve got to work together on this. It’s all intertwined.



D MAGAZINE: What about the whole question of planning and growth? How do we balance the interests of businessmen and developers against those who have to live and drive in areas affected by rapid growth? Some areas of North Dallas are already impossible for several hours a day.

EVANS: That’s temporary, or course. There’s a lot of controversy about how you measure the number of automobiles we’re adding to the streets of Dallas. I could give you a survey that shows we have 100 autos added to the streets per week. Another will tell you that it’s 168 per day. Either way, that’s many more automobiles added to the streets than they were built to hold 10 years ago.



D MAGAZINE: Do you think that past and present city leadership has done enough leading on mass transit?

EVANS: We’ve delayed too long. I’ve got studies here that date back 20 years. We’ve studied ourselves to death; we’ve got drawings all over the place. I told Max Goldblatt [who favors a monorail system] that we’d conduct one more study, but the only thing he’s doing is delaying the referendum on the IRTA [Interim Regional Transit Authority].

You can’t say you’re not going to have state highways. Automobiles are not going to be extinct in 20 years. While we’ve been studying Central, we’ve been bogging down in other areas. Look at east-west traffic. Look at LBJ. And if we don’t build out to Highway 190 for another LBJ for the outer loop, we’re going to bog down again.

We’ve got to accommodate both the automobile and mass transit. And we’ve got to train people to use mass transit. It’s got to be affordable, and the only way we can justify it is with a 1-cent sales tax. We do need to move on this. If we started with mass transit tomorrow, it would be 1990 before it was completed for the entire city.

I’m not opposed to a monorail system. That’s one mode. But I don’t think it’s right for Councilman Goldblatt to appoint himself the person who’s going to develop transportation for the future needs of Dallas.



D MAGAZINE: Will you continue to be active on the IRTA?

EVANS: Yes, if I’m asked to remain on the board. I hope I am. Let me tell you how we’ve tried to do this. The IRTA board was formed with 25 members, 13 from the city of Dallas and 12 from the suburbs. The chairperson, Adlene Harrison, is from the city of Dallas. If the mayor were to step in and take over, you wouldn’t need a chairperson. But you’d have resentment from the suburbs over coming in that strong. I was one of the first to speak to the IRTA, and I could feel the vibes from the suburbs. They were thinking, “This is going to be another Dallas program, and we don’t want any part of it. ” I’ve intentionally tried to keep a lower profile.



D MAGAZINE: Would the city benefit from the mayor’s having more power? Would your term in office have been more productive if you’d had more clout?

EVANS: I don’t like to use the word “power, ” but you’ve got to have more authority. The mayor today can’t go into the council chambers with just one vote and get things done the way you could under the old at-large system. With single-member districts, every district has one vote just like the mayor has. The mayor needs more power in order to help persuade-not go in and hit someone over the head, but persuade-people to help us continue a planned-growth approach.

It’s not fair, in my judgment, for a person who represents one district to grab the ball and try to mold this whole city just to help that one district. If people can’t see that, they’re shortsighted. And I’d say the same thing if I were a single-member district person.

D MAGAZINE: How would you propose to give the mayor more power?

EVANS: First of all, veto power for the mayor.



D MAGAZINE: How would that work? A veto in any situation?

EVANS: It would be used mainly as a holding pattern. Many times you get into an emotional issue -like [the noise problems at] Love Field, for example -and you may lose a vote 6-5 in the council chambers. But if the mayor could stop that -put a veto on that -and just hold until studies are done or whatever has to be done is accomplished, the council could go back and vote it.

And another thing. The mayor is the representative of the city. When the mayor goes to Washington to see the senators and congressmen and try to do something for the city, he ought to be able to speak for the city and say “yes” or “no” without having to come back and see if the council approves.

The mayor has to have more clout, and 1 think you earn it. I’ve been fortunate in that this council has respected me very much in the decision processes. We’ve lost a few – but very few -and we’ve had a lot of 8-3 and 7-4 votes.



D MAGAZINE: What other changes would you favor for the mayor’s office?

EVANS: I think we should put a limit on the amount that can be spent in running for the office. The Folsom-Weber race in 1977, if converted to 1983 dollars, cost a million and a half dollars to run a campaign for a job that pays $50 a meeting. That’s wrong.

Also, I think the mayor’s term should be at least three years, and my preference would be four years. And I would stagger the terms of the council so you don’t lose all the council members at one time and have to start all over again.



D MAGAZINE: Suppose you had been elected to a four-year term. Would you still be planning to leave office now?

EVANS: I probably would have taken early retirement from the company.



D MAGAZINE: On the subject of expanding the mayor’s power, what about naming members to city boards and commissions?

EVANS: Some council members want the Park Board, for example, to have 11 members, with every council member appointing one to the board. I don’t agree. A councilperson does not spend the time the mayor spends and is not on call as much. When you have the city responsibility in total, as the mayor does, I think you should have more input into the decision-making process. Boards and committees are so important. I don’t think I or my successor should have just one appointment. I think the mayor should have an appointment to every committee, should be ex of-ficio on every committee and should be involved in naming the chair.



D MAGAZINE: Does it seem to you that we are still living in two Dallases -North and South? What should be done to bring more prosperity to South Dallas?

EVANS: North Dallas is another city of its own, of course. The area north of Northwest Highway has more people than the city of Fort Worth. It’s mind-boggling. We’ve tried to persuade industry to settle in South Dallas through tax incentives. We just haven’t been able to encourage people in the southern part of Dallas, and this has helped cause high density and high congestion in the northern part. I see a lot of opportunity in South Dallas, and I hope that the companies who take advantage of these incentives will be successful.



D MAGAZINE: Are you pleased with the increases in minority representation in city departments?

EVANS: I feel very strongly about affirmative action. I don’t care what color their skin is or what their nationality was prior to coming here. If they’re qualified, then yes, do it. But let’s don’t lower our standards. You have 36 inches in a yard. If a person measures up, great. But let’s not change it to 24 inches just to accommodate certain people.



D MAGAZINE: Do you see future mayors dealing more and more with diverse minority groups?

EVANS: Yes, very much. Dallas is an international city now. It’s not the same as when we were a cozy little bedroom town. You’ve got to represent all the people and be with all the people. That doesn’t mean we all have to have the same lifestyle. We’ve got people who come here from all over the world, and they’ve got different customs and lifestyles. We walk and talk with all.



D MAGAZINE: In your campaign for mayor, you promised to seek more citizen involvement in city affairs. What have you done in that direction?

EVANS: This office has to be moreopen, and I’ve tried to make it that way.I’ve seen people from all walks of life. I’vebeen to every single-member district fortown hall meetings. I’ve tried to be as visible a mayor as I can, and I hope my successors will continue that. You can’t turn itover to the city manager. When peoplewant to speak to the mayor, they want tospeak to the mayor.