Mike Rawlings Would Now Like to Have a Word About That Trail Safety Campaign Contract

By Robert Wilonsky Wed., May 11 2011 at 3:19 PM

Categories: Campaign News, City Hall, Park and Rec

Pin It

So far today we've heard from Ron Natinsky, David Kunkle, City Auditor Craig Kinton and even Mayor Dwaine Caraway about last night's Channel 8 story, which alleged that mayoral candidate Mike Rawlings used his influence as Park Board president to get city officials to hire his friend and former TracyLocke colleague Jake Schroepfer's ad agency for that Happy Trails safety campaign. Now, Mike Rawlings would like to have his say, as I asked his campaign for a statement concerning what he did or didn't do when Park and Rec officials awarded the contract without first issuing a request for proposals.

Without further ado, here is Rawlings's account in full:

In an effort to move quickly to create a safety campaign after a runner was killed on the Katy Trail, the Parks Director asked me to recommend ad professionals who might be willing to work pro bono or for dramatically reduced rates. I gave them the name of three agencies.

Jake:Ferguson, which is one of the firms I recommended, offered to do a portion of the work valued at more than $200,000 for only $24,500 -- this amount included the out-of-pocket expenses of filming and editing three TV ads, radio ads and a web video, so to get these items for only $24,500 is an unbelievable value for the City. The creative director for Jake:Ferguson is nationally-recognized for creating the Crash Test Dummies seatbelt campaign for the U.S. Department of Transportation, and to get this level of experience for our safety campaign was a win for the Parks Department.

I was not involved in awarding them this business, negotiating the cost or the contracts. Those issues are between the firms involved and the City officials responsible for those duties.

It is important to note that Jake:Ferguson was one of five firms who contributed to this campaign. I am not familiar with the other four firms who did the majority of the work, so to accuse me of doling out work to friends is just not truthful. It also is unfortunate that corporate citizens who were willing to step up and donate their services to the City during a time of crisis are now being dragged into the negative attacks of a mayoral campaign.

Nonetheless, the City has a duty to taxpayers and citizens to look into this and make sure that there is complete transparency and that all laws were obeyed.

Like this Story?

Sign up for the Weekly Newsletter: Our weekly feature stories, movie reviews, calendar picks and more - minus the newsprint and sent directly to your inbox.

Write Comment

Email to Friend

Print Article

Related Content

Yup. I live in Little Forest Hills. We dont like to think of it as Dallas but last I checked that makes me just as valuable as citizen as you ... although I am sure you'd beg to differ. Those who defend going around the law always think they are better than the rest of us.
I was leaning toward Kunkle, Natinsky, Okpa and Rawlings in that order. But now I'm going to write in NotAnotherTaskForce with hopes she/he at least laps Okpa.
Hey ChuckE. Absoutely a world class product, and I would not be surprised to see it gain massive recognition and pay for itself many times over. Observe that the "action item" of each sign is graphically more penetrating. As one approaches the sign in motion, first the desired behavior is indicated straightforwardly. Print one out, and run towards it. It's as clear as a bell, but from the distance, there's also something interesting about it that makes you keep looking. Then as you approach, you process the information at about the time you also notice that it's a smiley face. It's first rate. If the tone is not to one's taste, that is another matter, but as an overall design and concept, this could easily end up receiving awards. Cities study each other's campaigns, and because this kind of signage (and situation) is a particular challenge with the increase in this type of urban trail amenity, it WILL be studied.
Nothing has proven to have been done illegally or absent transparency..........What has been stated - is Rawlings provided names to the Parks Dept of possible vendors to develop an ad campaign. Parks Dept went about using a process in the City to get the work done. Those are the basic facts - Just because DMN exercises its right to have an opinion in this matter doesn't make it anything other than an opinion - just like you and me having opinions. Opinions are not facts - I believe voters will read through all this "stuff" and recognize it is all about politics - bottom line - otherwise why didn't DMN run this story earlier so the Auditor - assuming they would have decided to investigate - could have had time to vet the facts in advance of the election? Brett is playing politics with this story - Anyway, we will see soon from the voters.........By the way, can you vote in Dallas - NotAnother TaskForce? I can.......
Yesterday our paradigm of outstanding "investigative" reporting, Brett Shipp, had a follow-up story with the CEO of the Richards Group saying he would have done the trail job for free. Um. Okay, a comment from Rawlings saying he is "lukewarm" on the Richards Group (taken completely out of context by our careful reporter) bends Stan Richards out of shape. So when Brett "the Sleuth" Shipp calls him with a softball question, WTF do you think Stan is going to say? And this is newsworthy? Somebody earlier said WFAA would milk this lame story to death. They were correct.
And now the DMN admits Rawlings' perspective on the whole debacle is "troubling". Personally, I dont want someone as mayor who needs to "ramp up" on how to behave in a legal, transparent way. http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20110512-editorial-rawlings-and-the-dangers-of-mixing-friendship-with-business.ece
Love how you just throw opinions out there with no evidence to back up your claims. Sort of like Rawlings. OMG! Maybe you are Rawlings! God knows, your handle would sure be fitting then.
I think the name of his porno flick was "I'll Scratch Your Back if You'll Scratch Mine". Or was it "Happy Trails"?
And so NOW we learn that had The Richards Group even been contacted, they would have done the campaign for free rather than charging taxpayers $86,000 the way Jake Ferguson did. Why werent they contacted? Rawlings told Paul Dyer at the city that he was "lukewarm" to Richards Group getting the work. Cant imagine why since Jake Ferguson is a long-time crony of Rawlings. And still peopl on this blog crybaby that Rawlings is completely innocent in this fiasco. Next up -- the Dallas Morning News blasts Rawlings in an editorial tomorrow. So much for that endorsement.
Are you sure????
Yes in 2008, last time I looked we are in 2011............
much like the data to support your position..........you have nothing other than dead braincells...................
Brett did not prove anything other than some dumb city employee coached a vendor on how to submit an administrative action. That is a daily city activity............not a Rawlings issue.
I did and Notanothertaskforce - you just made my point. Only the Housing Authority can make those types of decisions...............Rawlings was a volunteer for the City of Dallas - asked by the Mayor to lead an effort to find a solution for Dallas' homeless issues. Which he did - not the shelter by Dallas Farmers Market. The Cliff Manor item was a related but not a Rawlings Homeless Czar issue. You need to do your research. Or maybe we do need another task force.....
The two choices are Rawlings and Rawlings................
I do watch the news - NotAnotherTaskForce. Memo doesn't mean a thing - other than some dumb city employee was trying to run around the system. That is not Rawlings doing - that is a city employee. And, again, the dept director, City Manager and City Attorney have to sign off on administrative actions. So the real story, if you did your research, is not about Rawlings, but about Citystaffrunamuk
Would agree with Mike.......lame and lazy thinking..........
This may have worthwhile info in it, but the complete lack of any line returns results in us all going -- pass over!
And you really want us to believe that the city only contacted one of three recommended firms, the one whose owner is a long time best friend of Rawlings, the guy in charge of parks, without Rawlings knowledge? Really? If that were the case then he shouldn't be elected mayor out of incompetence. He was head of parks. Why would he NOT know what was going on?
Get YOUR facts straight, Brainrunamuk. Rawlings was the HOMELESS czar when the DHA decided to move the HOMELESS from The Bridge to Cliff Manor. Council had nothing to do with it, in fact, they wanted to stop it but couldnt. Rawlings was, as homeless czar, sitting in big chair up front during town hall meeting and was introduced by Leppert as instrumental in the decision. And he has defended the decision at mayoral forums. You must be from another planet.
Isnt going to happen. However, you can still be converted. You have TWO choices who aren't crooks.
Cityrunamuk -- Um dude do you even WATCH television? There are internal memos from the city saying, "Uh, lower your bid by a few hundred dollars would you?" It is in writing. It is against the law to do that. Comprende?
Ms. Suhm, who became eligible for retirement several years ago, should have been retired by now. Someone must consider retiring her when they become mayor of Dallas.
Aha, it looks like nothing has changed since I left City Hall a couple of years ago. Incompetence, finger-pointing, blame-gaming, and nobody seeing the real truth.
No. To be any lazier, I'd be spending all my intelligence on, say ... Tweeting about the Rangers bullpen. God knows I'm not THAT lazy.
Could you be any lazier in your thinking?
You missed the point. The point is that the number is so low relative to the talent and earnings level of the person involved that it should make it pretty obvious that the deal wasn't about some scandalous arrangement. More likely it was just a friend helping out another with a project the former's group needed done. How can we assume this? Because the work was done for an amount that is of almost no consequence to the person whose firm did the work. We're talking about an amount of money that likely did little more than cover the project expenses and pay for the time of the people at the firm. That this is the biggest "scandal" Natinsky and Channel 8 could find on Rawlings says a lot about his character.
Both City Manager Mary Suhm and City Attorney Tom Perkins have been engaging in highly questionable conduct for years.... one can take zero comfort in the fact that they may have signed off on this.
Why does the Dallas Morning News and “big money” endorse Mr. Rawlings. Very incestual….his partners have a lot to gain financially with Mr. Rawlings as Mayor. They are all intermingled on each other’s businesses, board of directors (check out the Metro Dallas Homeless Alliance Board – when Mr. Rawlings was homeless czar), etc. What about the taxpayer’s, neighborhood communities, small business owners, etc? People who truly want to see their neighborhoods and economic conditions improve for the good of the community?
The people of Dallas are smarter than that. Are you sure?
How do you know there is bid splitting? One the basis of this article which is a report of another report which is based upon allegations, yet to be proven........Judd, you maybe ought to wait until the facts are gathered before you render judgment. And if there was - budget splitting - whose fault is that? City Staff of course - they are the ones that signs the deals.................
So on the basis of one article you sit as judge and jury and determined Rawlings is guilty of what? Exactly??? You must live outside the city of Dallas
The 70's porno star pic of Rawlings always cracks me up. What even funnier, is that he used it in his own mailings.
I am so sorry you are a Kunklehead.........there is a remedy - VOTE FOR RAWLINGS
Cliff Manor was not Rawlings deal that was the Housing Authority and City Council issue. Get your fact correct
Who is stealing anything.........
A) It is not Mike Rawlings' fault if the city failed to contact all three firms he recommended. That is their call,not his. B) Again, if something is amiss, the city staff is responsible, so if they were concerned internally they should have dealt with it. C) Again, if the city chose an ad firm instead of a design firm to do the trail, that was their call. But in fairness this project had more components than just way finding. D) This is not Shipp's finest moment, being used as a tool by Natinsky. I do not object to him uncovering something. It's the way he shamelessly tried to tie a mayoral candidate to all this, without putting everything in context, as a purely political ploy, that is offensive and schlocky. E) Again, if the city wants to clean up its own mess, so be it. But Mike Rawlings is not the hire/fire guy here, and all you Natinsky or Kunkle lovers out there trying to make political points on this are obvious.
Whether there was split contracting or not - yet to be determined.......that is a City Parks Dept issue not a Rawlings issue. So you can fault someone for offering options for city staff to consider, then city staff determine to circumvent the system........how is that a Rawlings issue? That is a Parks Dept issue..........and City Manager problem.
So, if you're the former head of Ford Motor Company, and you steal a couple of cars, that's nothing to you...
We are already trained to gather quick bits of information Using signage by its shape and color. Sorry but The new signs are FUN ? . Not informational. Aside from the normal trail traffic signs A large information sign about trail rules and behavior at all entrances is all that is needed. If that's not working just close the trail because it would seem folks aren't grown up enough to read the printed word or show common courtesy can't handle this kind of personal freedom .
There is a problem here with the bid splitting. The defenses seem to be 1) well city staff was involved 2) big time ad guys sniff at the paltry sum of the ad work. Neither of these defenses excuse or limit the responsibility for a civic minded person to say "Uh no guys that budget splitting thing is common place in the corporate world but we cannot do that down here at the city". This is what a good mayor does. They make the right decision when no one else is looking.
After learning more about the whole deal, I have to agree. I don't think Rawlings cared one way or the other what happened with this whole deal - he was asked for recommendations (as a former ad guy, makes sense) and he gave them. He basically recommended some of the top agencies in town. Everyone involved worked for basically nothing. Yes, the city got a good deal - everything at a cheap discount for a rush job. What irritates me (and probably Rawlings at this point) is the original idea that this whole campaign was even needed, especially the creation of an entire new set of graphics.
People seem to be missing or otherwise misunderstanding the point of the signs and the overall campaign. The campaign is about raising awareness of trail etiquette and rules. MUTCD deals with cautionary signs (stop signs, curve ahead, narrow bridge, etc) and does not generally have signs dealing keeping your dog on a short leash, looking before you turn or keeping your volume down so you can hear people approaching from behind. The City already uses MUTCD signs to notify trail users of turns and where the trail ends etc. Something new was needed to get people's attention and let them know how to conduct themselves on the trails. Whether or not one likes the sign design is subjective but they are definitely different, are getting people's attention and creating a dialogue on overall trail safety and etiquette.
Controversy follows Rawlings wherever he goes. First there was the Cliff Manor debacle while he was Homeless Czar. He leaps out of that frying pan into this fire. All because he is about pushing an agenda rather than doing what's right. I just pray the people of Dallas will connect the dots and get that this guy IS NOT the sort of person we want running the city. Please Natinsky or Kunkle either one not THIS guy.
Sharon, I would expect that maybe Kunkel would appoint you chair of the Plan Commission. This is what we would expect from him as mayor. Hopefully that doesn't happen. If you want irony, consider that he's f'king a zoning consultant. Usually it's the other way around...
OKAY so we have the signs the city is going to put up. Here is the manual of the way the Signs have to meet Federal Standards . And are the ones which are restricted by color and design. Fed money used to build fed regulations have to be followed.These aren't suggestions they are the rules . http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009/pdf_index.htm The city traffic people know /// should have known where to look for the signage that is needed and all they needed to do is check the book and order them or make them in house . http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009/part9.pdf Bike and trail signs are here! But no they committee up and re-event the wheel ! What a waste!
QUICK TO GET TO WORK TO GET THINGS DONE...YOU MUST BE GETTING PAID OR HAVE A BRAIN CELL MISSING....
"Move quickly"...who does Rawlings think we are...a bunch of idiots.... that stinks like he does....so he wants to be king of contracts....you know...he needs to hit the Happy Trails right out of politics....WE DO NOT NEED A CROOKED MAYOR IN DALLAS
In other words, na-ne-na-ne boo boo, eh? Wow, we're all dazzled by the logic you use and the way you back up your opinion with facts. Truly stunning.
Note that Lakewood has failed to come up with a shred of evidence to back his/her arrogant claim. So, there you go.
The high and mighty Really fails to grasp that A) Mike Rawlings said he recommended three firms for the project but in fact, two of them say they were never contacted -- meaning only one firm (run by one of Rawlings bestest friends) was contacted for the project. B) Internal memos show that Parks Dept staff were very concerned about the way the project was being piecemealed to circumvent the open bid process. There is no good reason whatsoever for the project to have been broken up the way it was -- except to circumvent open bid. C) In other cities, wayfinding projects like this almost never go to ad agencies and the result is a comical, silly campaign that wayfinding experts agree will have little to no impact on safety on the trail D) Brett Shipp has the highest credentials in broadcast journalism, winning awards from Columbia University. Call it schlock all you want to, it just shows your lack of credibility on the topic. It's like saying Tom Brady is a schlock football player. E) City auditor has decided the arrangement loioks fishy enough to merit a full investigation. City auditor is not a Natinsky (or Kunkle) campaign employee.
So we're hearing the deflect and parry defense from the advertising professionals. What a surprise. How about all those suburban karate school owners and high school debaters? And, for the record, I'm a Kunklehead.
Good point. Check out all of the AAs Kunkle signed/authorized while Chief.
Cityrunamuk is absolutely correct. Sounds like he/she is on the inside because how he/she described it is exactly how it goes down on the infamous "fourth floor" at City Hall. This is how it probably went down. The City had to respond quickly to the tragic accident on the Katy Trail. Remember the speed at which the task force looking at trail safety was put together? So the task force recommends new signage. Rather than go through the procurement process to award a contract of this size, the Queen Mary and her self appointed heir apparent (Forrest Turner) said "We need to hurry up and get it done. The Mayor said he has already called Paul and told him to talk to Mike about getting a hook up from someone in the business." So how did Rawlings learn how to break up the contract and keep each piece of the work to just under $25k? Who taught him that using an administrative action is the easiest & fastest way to get the contractor started on the work and paid? Paul Dyer and his blond shadow who doesn't even have a calculator with a tape on her desk. Yes, taxpayers. That is who is in charge of counting and accounting for the Park Department’s $. Park department has long been known for being “shady.” So, I give you the key points that have been missed: 1. Nothing will happen to Paul Dyer. Everyone knows that Paul doesn’t do what anyone on the 4th floor tells him to do. He’s quick to remind all that he reports to the Park Board, not the Queen Mary much less F. Turner. There is no love lost between him & the Queen which is why she dispatches Forrest to hurl F and GD words at Paul. 2. Anyone notice how Forrest Turner who normally can’t flash his mug enough before cameras and at council meetings has gone into seclusion lately? Why, you ask? Because his departments continue to be caught in the midst of one controversy after another. Animal shelter mismanagement, theft of computers from police squad cars parked at the city service center awaiting repair, code compliance problems, etc. He has ruined every single department that he served as director of or that reports to him as Asst City Manager. He is now hiding out because he doesn’t know which corner to sit in. He constantly brags to employees that he will be the next City Manager when the Queen leaves. Gives new meaning to the song “God Save the Queen.” Employees are saying, “God help us all.” 3. WHO leaked those e mails to Channel 8? Anyone notice that one of the three (yes, 3) Chiefs of Staff to current/temporary Mayor is included on Kunkle’s list of supporters? Sure, every City employee has the right to make a contribution and/or support a candidate but if she had a brain she would have made it in the name of one of her pets. As she tells it, Kunkle plans to make her his Chief of Staff when he becomes Mayor. Sweet revenge for her since the Queen banished her from the kingdom of the 4th floor by eliminating her position a few years ago. Like so many who were “laid off,” she had been stashed down the street in another department making the same money until she was summoned to walk Carraway. She knows how bid splitting & AA’s (administrative actions) work & she has used them to give jobs to HER buddies in the graphics, printing, design & advertising business. Someone go look up how many AAs she has been behind in her years at City Hall. So there you have it. Opportunity + motive = suspect. 4. So many AAs are processed daily that they are backed up in the City Attorney’s Office awaiting approval & signature. Keep in mind that the guilty ones here are the ones who approved the AAs. Who reviews/approves them? The Department Director, the Assistant City Manager who oversees the department, the Chief Financial Officer & the City Attorney’s Office. Why didn’t Brett Shipp’s girlfriend (or is she wifey now?) tell him that when she was City Attorney, her attorneys spent hours rubber stamping the AAs? The AA that Mike Rawlings supposedly masterminded could have been stopped & questioned at the many places where the AA stopped for review & approval. But it wasn’t. Tell me again who the guilty one is. Makes you wonder why the former CFO left the City so unexpectedly. He couldn’t stand the sh** he was being forced to cook and had to get out of the kitchen. He was known as the good guy always trying to do the right thing. Unlike the current CFO who needs to support her addiction to $900 handbags, he couldn’t be and had no need to be “bought.” The Interim Purchasing Director is being ridiculed by fellow executives for expressing his concerns in an e mail. Oh, goodness. Another honest guy covering his tail. For employees, that means another verbal warning through channels from the 4th floor not to put anything in writing. 5. Why isn’t someone questioning the council members – especially Natinsky – about approving the $100k plus contract that was awarded to a consulting firm to do some sort of analysis of the waste management services in Dallas? The Asst City Manager who was responsible for overseeing the City’s Sanitation department left less than 18 months ago and is an officer in the company that was awarded the contract. HE is doing the study. Can you spell flow control? Why didn’t anyone have heartburn over that contract award? Oh, that is right. Because it was “hidden” on the consent agenda just like the changes to the ethics policy. Because it has been pointed out repeatedly on many blogs about the AA factory at City Hall, it means that you – Dallas Observer – need to uncover the mess behind the AA factory. It doesn’t start or stop with this one involving Rawlings. This is peanuts compared to the other ones that are sitting out there waiting to be exposed. Don’t interrupt the City Auditor now. His staff is busy investigating the Sanitation department. If Channel 8 was truly interested in doing real investigative journalism, they wouldn’t be fishing in such shallow waters. Go deep to uncover the real story. Hope to see the DO on the fishing boat pronto!
Good. Let them investigate. Will you conclude that nothing unethical was done if that's what the city auditor concludes? Two people at the top of the Dallas advertising world know each other. Wow. What a scandal.
What a silly story. Jake Schroepfer's the former head of Tracy-Locke as well as the former head of DDB Dallas. These are major ad agencies (both since acquired by Omnicom, the 2nd largest ad agency in the world). A $24,500 project is a rounding error on the list of deals Schroepfer has overseen in his career. What a total hack job by Channel 8. Pathetic.
The high and mighty "virtuous" folks on this page who think this was a sweetheart deal for Jake:Ferguson have no idea what they are talking about and no idea about the money ad agencies get. As subsequent reports have shown, the pressure to get the campaign done quickly, professionally and at a ridiculously low cost led to Rawlings recommending three agencies that might be willing to help. Does Rawlings, former CEO of the largest ad agency in the southwest have a few friends in the business? Duh. Of course. But it is clear that Mike, who was not a staff member with authority to hire/fire, had nothing but a recommending capacity in the actual decision making process. He has already explained that the "lukewarm" comment about the Richards Group related to that agency perhaps not wanting the job because it paid so little. Of course the WFAA story took that "lukewarm" comment out of context to make their BS story seem snazzier than it really was. If something was amiss in all this, the responsibility lies with the city staff. But since this whole story was a political schlock job from the Natinsky camp, they are trying to smear Rawlings. It's garbage journalism.
Second rate garbage fed to him by Natinsky's goons. It's not even good sensationalism. Just silliness. I guess Brett's standards have slipped. I don't care what awards he's won before. This is a classic October surprise BS story he was dupe enough to run with.
Redirect and parry. Classic Rawlings. This is as clear a signal of the kind of mayor he will be if elected as we could possibly get. It's amazing that anyone in this day and age (except advertising professionals, suburban karate school owners and high school debaters) would fall for Rawlings' act.
Utterly missing the point. Rawlings lambasted Natinsky for ethics issues. Maybe people do AAs daily but they don't help structure AAs so their long-time closest friends get the contract. And if they do, they SHOULD be called on the carpet for it because it violates state law. Doing an AA is not an ethics violation. People within the city were concerned about how this was being done however and Brett Shipp proved that through internal emails. Dont blow the ethics trumpet on Monday and then turn around on Tuesday and turn a dead ear to it because it is your buddy who is getting trounced by it. City auditor disagrees with you that it is a non-story, so there you have it.
The City of Dallas awards no - bid agreement through administrative actions daily.....With this one, you can go to the bank on this statement - Paul Dyer - long time experienced city department head, would not sign off on this administrative action absent the full support and knowledge of Mary Suhm. The administrative action form, must be signed off by the City Manager's office and the City Attorney's Office. Further, administrative actions are routinely reported to the City Council. This is all about politics and someone on the inside of City Hall playing politics in the Mayor's race. Could it be City Hall is worried about a Mayor Rawlings at the helm? WFAA was played like a drum by those seeking to discredit Rawlings. You need to ask Kunkle how many no bid adminstrative actions he advanced while head of the Police Dept? There is no smoke or fire with this one.......
Rawlings just got my vote. Up until reading this article, I was going back and forth between Rawlings and Kunkle. Thank you Mr. Rawlings for showing how quick and well you work to get things done. And, thank you Mr. Ferguson for giving to our City and for the work your company performed to ensure safety for those who enjoy the parks/trails.
Looking at the Signs I understand we are now A Disney World class city.
Rtgolden is right. It is crime enough this job went for $80,000 + to a major ad agency. The fact the bid project was skipped makes it doubly criminal.
And the data you have backing up that claim would be...??? How do we not know it is the Kunkle campaign behind this?
Skip the agency aspect all together and get a full service Sign Company to do the work, (most of your Agencies are going to sub the job out to a sign company anyway). There's no shortage of locally-owned small business sign shop who could have handled this project in-house.
"world-class product"? Seriously? Have you seen the incomprehensible signs?
I guess that you are the only person in the city that believes that. Rawlings is just another politician that thinks the voters are stupid.
I accept your apology.
Regardless of Brett's credentials, this was a second rate story "investigated" and aired at the direction of the Natinsky campaign.
Really? A second rate local investigative reporter? As in... "Brett's investigation resulted in his being awarded the two most coveted prizes in broadcast journalism, the 2008 duPont Gold Baton and the 2008 George Foster Peabody Award. The seldom awarded Gold Baton from Columbia University was the first ever given to a local television reporter." Boy if you are going to step out into the world of blogging, understand the first rule is thou must have at least a shred of credibility with your comments.
Jim Bob -- Do you find it the least bit ironic you seem to fail to grasp that the story is about how Rawlings keeps changing his story on questions he is asked about? Sharon's comment had everything to do with the story she was commenting on - how Rawlings will say 'x' and then come back and start sidestepping the discussion in a different direction as his comments here do. Sorry you don't get that.
Margaret: It doesnt matter how much 'value' the city got if the contracts were let out illegally. You dont justify illegal behavior by saying, "Well but we got a lot of value from it." The entire project was in the $80,000-100,000 range. But was broken up into smaller $20,000 projects to avoid the open-bid process. And these aren't broadcast ads -- they are signs. Understand?
This is a classic example of a second-rate local "investigative" reporter willfully creating a controversy and spinning every out-of-context detail into a predetermined narrative, avoiding proper research because it would weaken the story, and all probably with the help and direction of Natinsky's political hacks.
Do you find it the least bit ironic that your comment about Rawlings' answer having nothing to do with the question, had nothing to do with the story you commented on?
At the TJ High School debate for NW Dallas, Rawlings was asked one question but came back with an unrelated response about the reason Dallas is so great is because 5 families gave a million each to get the Performance Hall started. Very few of his answers had any connection to the question asked. This is what we would expect from him as mayor. Hopefully, that doesn't happen.
Value ≠ Worth. What the hell good are those commercials to the people of Dallas? They aren't worth $10, doesn't matter how much they normally would "cost." And the signs are crap. It takes a god-damn decoder ring to know what you are and are not supposed to do on the trail.
$200,000 for this crap is a total scam if you ask me. This should've been a signage project, not an advertising experiment. These signs will not save lifes, because all the cutesy smiley faces clutter up the important messages. A signage agency would have done this work for no more than $30k and would have done it correctly. Add about another $20k for installation and fabrication and you are done. Way to go, Mike-o.
You are absolutely correct. An agency specializing in Signage and Wayfinding (otherwise known as Environmental Graphic Design) should have been awarded this contract rather than an Ad agency. Being one of those specialists myself, I can give you my professional assessment that these signs don't do a lick of good.
The cost is not the point. There is a process of competitive bidding that was circumvented in order to give the job to a crony of Rawlings that he has worked with for years. Perhaps this is the way it is done in CEO Mike's world, but not with the public's money. Bye, bye Mike. glad we didn't get to know you better.
so as long as the city gets a good deal, it doesn't matter whether ethics rules were violated? this is why Dallas is getting fleeced by corporate stooges.
The Park and Recreation Board got a steal for its money. Saying the value was $200,000 for its $23,400 is to way under state the value the city got. I have paid for commercials for a major retailer and just one :30 second spot was closer to $300,000. $24,000 didn't pay the day rate for a director and this was four years ago. I hope someone forces the reporter to do some more digging and report the truth.
And, it wouldn't matter so much if Rawlings hadnt held himself up as the paragon of ethics. Bottom line -- city auditor now says they will open a formal investigation into the matter and I've just heard someone will be filing an ethics complaint against Paul Dyer with the city for this. Kunkle was polic chief -- I think he knows when a crime has been committed and when it hasnt.
No accountability chain? He was overseeing the Parks Foundation when it happened, Bullchitz! The people of Dallas aren't as stupid as you think we are. Project coming in at $100,000 total gets broken into smaller projects just under the threshold for an open bid (violating state law in the process) and are then given to longtime buddy of Rawlings. How convenient. Give us some credit for a brain, would ya'?
As far as Rawlings is concerned, I'd say you can file this under "No good deed goes unpunished." Channel 8 gets some ratings for a few days, and someone catches a ration of shit for actually getting a world-class product on the cheap. Nice work, media. Really encourages people to do the right thing... This was never a story about Rawlings. Brett Shipp took a cheap shot for ratings, knowing damn well that there's no conceivable accountability chain involving Rawlings.
Which is all well and good but on the Mark Davis show this morning, Rawlings was asked about this and said he suggested they break up the larger project into smaller ones that would each be under $25,000, an act that would violate state law. Rawlings is changing his story it appears as the spotlight grows more intense. He has been caught red-handed and now is trying to back away from it. The people of Dallas are smarter than that.
Hope I am not the only one bothered by this statement. Rawlings spends the first part of it telling taxpayers why we should be impressed with his friend's credentials and generosity. There are two points: 1) no matter how padded the guy's C.V is, taxpayers still shelled out $23,400, and 2) there are questions about whether or not his friend was instructed to ask for a certain amount so as not to activate the competitive bid process. Three days until the election is decided and Rawlings uses the time to toot the horn of his buddy. A person ready to serve would have addressed this issue differently. There is a third point. The sign campaign his friend came up with is too ad agency--too much information to gather when traveling at walking or biking speed. "Infovis"--it's a science using intelligence and economy of imagery to get a point across. We should have used it for the Katy Trail, but we didn't because there were no competing ideas.