Dallas was right to question University Park request for 18 acres
Texas House speaker race is a GOP purity disaster
The Texas Rangers are making the summer interesting as they battle the Houston Astros for supremacy of the American League West division. General manager Chris Young, a good local boy and Highland Park Scot, decided to make some changes in both management and the players. It’s working.
If the city of Dallas were a baseball team at midpoint in the season, you could be sure they would not be headed to the playoffs. Who is saying this? Dallas residents, who recently pilloried the city almost across the board on its performance in a recent satisfaction study.
ETC Institute completed its 10th citizen satisfaction study on behalf of the city of Dallas. The Kansas-based company is the national leader, having completed 2 million surveys in 1,000 cities since 2010. It first surveyed Dallas in 2006.
That longevity is useful. It gives us an indication of whether Dallas is improving, or getting worse. It’s mostly the latter. Dallas citizens are resoundingly concerned about the direction of the city. No one likes a prolonged losing streak.
The two biggest indicators that citizens are unsatisfied with the city’s direction are the perceived value they receive for their tax dollars and the current direction of the city. In both categories citizens did not hold back in assigning failing grades.
Nearly half (47%) believe that they are not receiving a good value for their tax dollars. Only 3% assigned the highest rating regarding getting their money’s worth, while a total of 24% thought that there was generally good value for their tax dollars. In 2014 that number stood at 44%.
Only 5% feel strongly about the current direction of the city. Compare this with the 41% that feel strongly the direction is headed the wrong way. The “fans” do not approve of the current level of play.
Overall, only 28% of citizens polled were “pleased with the overall direction that the city of Dallas is taking.” In 2014 that number was 53%.
To go from every other citizen being satisfied to about half that number is a tragic fall, and a huge hole to dig out from.
“They don’t look very satisfied,” City Council member Cara Mendelsohn remarked. “The results are pretty shocking and should be a wake-up call.”
I know throwing out wonkish City Hall statistics is as enjoyable as being stuck on an elevator with a talkative CrossFitter, but in this case the story is the numbers.
There were 1,475 surveys completed across all 14 City Council districts. For a city with a 2020 Census population of 1,304,379, that might seem low. But the number of completed surveys is more than residents who voted for the winners in four City Council districts in the most recent election.
Importantly, the study represented a true demographic cross-section from every council district — much more so than local elections do. Only 37% of household members included were age 50 or older, and only 16% over 65. By contrast, Dallas voters skew well over 60, on average. Half of the survey respondents have lived in Dallas longer than 30 years. And 60% are owners of a home.
Citizens are clamoring for improvements in three primary areas: homelessness, police and crime, and streets.
In the comments section, one respondent summed up the complaints: “If you care about this city, make sure it’s safe, the roads aren’t full of potholes, and that it’s easy to open a business.”
Respondents fear for their safety. Only 3% feel very safe from violent crime, but 20% feel very unsafe from it. Similarly, 2% feel very safe from property crime, while 23% feel very unsafe from it. Just 1% of citizens feel very safe in downtown Dallas after dark, while 24% feel very unsafe and another 35% feel unsafe. Most worrisome, only 42% of citizens feel very safe or somewhat safe in their own neighborhood after dark. When nearly half of citizens feel this way at home, there is a serious problem.
There is also a deterioration in satisfaction for police service. In 2014, crime was only perceived as a major problem by 39% of citizens. Now that number is 61%. The 2014 study reported that 55% of respondents were satisfied with police response times. It has now fallen to 24%. Crime prevention has fallen from 50% to 23% satisfied.
Homelessness is identified by 75% of respondents as a major problem, compared with only 40% in 2014.
Street and sidewalk maintenance was the top priority of 59% of respondents. Residents gave failing grades to the condition of thoroughfares, neighborhood streets, alleys and sidewalks. Thoroughfare conditions were rated poor, the lowest category, by 43% of citizens. (Somehow 2% thought them excellent. I’d like to find where they are doing their driving.) Nearly half of the respondents thought maintenance of neighborhood streets was poor. Amazingly, the city manager’s proposed budget for the next two years calls for a total budget reduction in spending on transportation and infrastructure.
Another department rated as badly as streets was planning, where only 5% rated it excellent and 71% thought it poor or fair. (I’ll cover this much more thoroughly in a future piece.)
Other areas have seen a dramatic downturn since the 2014 survey. A reduction of 20 or more points occurred in several important areas:
The city’s favorability as a place to raise children has fallen by 15%, as well.
These are the same huge drop-offs in satisfaction the Rangers saw during their losing years. Unfortunately, citizens cannot send a message by not attending games. They have to keep paying taxes, even in bad years, unless they plan to move. The question the survey does not ask, and should be included in future studies, is, “Do you plan to continue living in Dallas?”
I worry that one respondent might decide to move: “Pull corporate jobs back into Dallas city proper,” the respondent noted, “instead of far flung suburbs like Frisco. I am so tired of having to commute huge distances for an office job. We need more density in Dallas proper, rather than driving 40 minutes one way for dinner, work and friends.”
With the city apparently seeking a bond package of more than $1 billion, will these unhappy citizens back such a bold initiative, especially when the trend over the past 10 years seems downward?
Now that the Dallas City Council has returned from its monthlong summer All-Star break, I hope they’ll decide, like Rangers’ ownership, to chart a course out of last place. Fix the streets, make the city safe, improve the homeless and panhandling problems. Citizens want basic city services that they feel are a good value for their tax dollars.
That’s the playoffs and the payoff.
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here. If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at letters@dallasnews.com
Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones is exploring options for a new head coach following the departure of Mike McCarthy, and one name generating buzz is franchise legend Jason Witten. Known as the best tight end in Cowboys history, Witten has long been a favorite of Jones and is being considered for the high-profile role.
McCarthy and the Cowboys parted ways after five seasons, ending a tenure that included three consecutive 12-5 records but just one playoff win. The coaching search is officially underway, and Witten’s name has surfaced alongside other contenders.
Witten, an 11-time Pro Bowler and the franchise leader in games starts, receptions, and receiving yards, has deep ties to Dallas. While his coaching experience is limited to leading a private high school team to a state championship, his leadership qualities and familiarity with the organization make him a compelling, albeit unconventional, option.
If hired, Witten would follow a path similar to Detroit Lions head coach Dan Campbell, another former Cowboys tight end. Campbell transitioned to the NFL coaching ranks after years of assistant coaching experience, a step Witten has yet to take. However, Jones has a history of making bold decisions, and Witten’s intimate understanding of the Cowboys’ culture could give him an edge.
While some question whether Witten’s high school coaching background is sufficient preparation for the NFL, Jones values loyalty and passion for the franchise, qualities Witten embodies. His connection with the Cowboys and leadership on and off the field could make him an intriguing choice to guide the team into its next chapter.
Jones’ next coach will be his ninth. The first four were first-time NFL head coaches, starting with Jimmy Johnson when Jones bought the team in 1989. The former University of Miami coach won back-to-back Super Bowls before an acrimonious split with Jones, his college teammate at Arkansas.
Three of Jones’ past four hires had NFL head coaching experience, including Super Bowl winners Bill Parcells and McCarthy. The exception was former Dallas quarterback Jason Garrett, the longest-tenured coach under Jones at nine-plus seasons.
The Cowboys have yet to release updates on the search, but Jason Witten remains a name to watch as the process unfolds.
About four minutes into the Dallas Mavericks’ recent contest against the Denver Nuggets, starting center Dereck Lively left the contest with an ankle injury.
Evidently, the Mavericks are already dealing with massive injuries to Luka Doncic and Kyrie Irving. Those two superstars lead the team and Lively is right up there as one of the more impactful players on the team.
However, just one day after the injury, Lively has already gotten X-ray updates back on his sprained right ankle, and it’s a bit of a relief for Mavericks fans. Chris Haynes provided the recent update.
“Dallas Mavericks center Dereck Lively II received an X-ray on his sprained right ankle and results were negative. No timeline established as of now,” Haynes reported.
The Mavericks are struggling to stay healthy, though doing so by April is the main goal and it’s just January. Lively has had issues remaining on the hardwood for the club in his inaugural two seasons, and it’s leaving some fans concerned.
READ MORE: Latest Timeline for Luka Doncic’s Return to Dallas Mavericks Revealed
Stick with CommanderGameday and the Locked On Commanders podcast for more FREE coverage of the Washington Commanders throughout the 2024 season.
Follow Kade on Twitter.
The Dallas city manager search has unspooled in the chaotic style we’ve come to expect from this City Council. There was the ho-hum recruitment brochure draft featuring the wrong skyline. There was the council civil war over the timeline of the search and the flow of information about candidates. And nothing says “we’ve got our act together” like eleventh-hour candidate interviews the day before Christmas Eve.
When two original semifinalists and a former Dallas city official dropped out of the race, no one was surprised.
We wish the next city manager the best of luck because no amount of talent and hard work can overcome a fundamental flaw of this search, and that is the lack of formal, measurable goals by the City Council. Our city is about to hire its CEO, but its board of directors has no metrics to set expectations or hold that person accountable for the most important job in Dallas.
If you want to understand how dysfunctional the situation is, start with the fact that the council’s appointees — the city manager, city attorney, city secretary and city auditor — haven’t had a performance review in more than two years. Our last city manager, T.C. Broadnax, had his last evaluation in August 2022. He left in May 2024. Interim City Manager Kimberly Bizor Tolbert, the front-runner for the job, hasn’t had an evaluation since her appointment last spring.
The council has hired a consultant over the years to help conduct the evaluations of its appointees. But no consultant can fix this council’s main problem, and that is its inability to come together to develop a consensus around four or five priorities and the metrics to measure progress in those areas.
Even when performance reviews for council appointees were happening, the process was broken. The council’s consultant called council members individually to solicit feedback, with the consultant identifying “themes” shared verbally with the council, and with no particular comments attributed to specific people, according to a 2022 memorandum from Management Partners, the firm hired to do the work. The city manager and other appointees were “invited” to prepare a report on their accomplishments and goals for next year, with the potential for “refinements” based on council input.
There was no written report from the performance evaluation, other than any goals reports produced by the appointees.
It’s a shockingly wishy-washy approach to evaluating an employee, let alone a C-suite executive.
And don’t expect even a veneer of transparency for taxpayers. Last year, we requested Broadnax’s goal reports and were told by the city that there were no responsive records, only to hear a council member remind her colleagues last week that Broadnax produced a memo with his goals after his last performance review in 2022. City staff failed to release this memo in response to our request. Such a document should be public under the Texas Public Information Act.
Now, on the brink of hiring its next city manager, the council is panicking about the fact that it hasn’t evaluated its council appointees in a long time and that it has no measurable goals for any of them. The council committee whose job it is to codify the annual review process can’t seem to agree on how to move forward.
Mayor Pro Tem Tennell Atkins chairs the committee. In a December meeting, he led a discussion on next steps to resume performance reviews of council appointees. Council members learned that their previous consulting firm, Management Partners, had been acquired by Baker Tilly, the company that is leading the messy city manager search. But the woman who had worked closely with the council on previous performance reviews was no longer associated with either company.
The committee gave city staff mixed signals on how to proceed. Some council members said they wanted to continue working with the previous consultant. Others asked to hear from Baker Tilly. Some said they were dissatisfied with the previous consultant or concerned about Baker Tilly and wanted to hear from other vendors. Council members said to move quickly.
By the time the council committee picked the conversation back up this month, confusion reigned. Baker Tilly prepared a presentation that described a performance review process very similar to what the council had with its previous partner. Atkins indicated that the council was moving forward with Baker Tilly using an existing contract, and other committee members pushed back. Meanwhile, an assistant city manager and an assistant human resources director couldn’t answer a council member’s simple question about when the council appointees were last evaluated.
“Yes, we are overdue for these reviews, but I think that they should be pursued seriously with the appropriate time periods involved,” said council member Paul Ridley. “I don’t think we should out of convenience select someone who is doing other work for the city at the present time.”
Council member Jesse Moreno asked whether Baker Tilly would have a conflict of interest in facilitating the performance review of an executive the firm helped hire. A representative tried to assuage Moreno, but he is right to bring that up, given that Baker Tilly would be required to conduct a new search at no cost to Dallas if the city manager doesn’t last a year. Council members should be skeptical. (Keep in mind it was Baker Tilly that produced the hiring brochure for Dallas city manager. The cover photo was a shining image of the Houston skyline.)
The council now seems poised to consider other consultants for the performance evaluations. Council members should do their due diligence instead of repeating their sloppiness for the sake of comfort.
Hire a consultant, if you must, to moderate the conversation or offer pointers, but a management firm can’t do the hard work for you.
Outgoing council member Jaynie Schultz said it best: “This problem is ours as a council. We have not done our work. And so we can try spending all of our time diverting all the problem and the blame on Baker Tilly. … The delay is us, 100% us.”
The council’s job is not to run the city but to set clear, measurable expectations for the people it hires to do that. It’s telling that council members have relied on a consultant to remind them to perform a fundamental duty.
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here. If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at letters@dallasnews.com
Meta is highlighting a splintering global approach to online speech
Metro will offer free rides in L.A. through Sunday due to fires
Las Vegas police release ChatGPT logs from the suspect in the Cybertruck explosion
‘How to Make Millions Before Grandma Dies’ Review: Thai Oscar Entry Is a Disarmingly Sentimental Tear-Jerker
Michael J. Fox honored with Presidential Medal of Freedom for Parkinson’s research efforts
Movie Review: Millennials try to buy-in or opt-out of the “American Meltdown”
Photos: Pacific Palisades Wildfire Engulfs Homes in an L.A. Neighborhood
Trial Starts for Nicolas Sarkozy in Libya Election Case