A review of the Lawrence City Commission’s “ideal candidate” for city manager sent us searching the News Center for that mild-mannered reporter, Clark Kent, who might be persuaded to strip down to his Superman togs and leap over to City Hall in a single bound.

Top among the “personal” qualifications listed by commissioners was “able to deal with the ambiguity inherent with building a new governance system with the City Commission :” That “ambiguity” was a continuing theme through the rest of the list.

Commissioners reveal, for instance, that Lawrence is “a growing metropolitan area that is not entirely comfortable with the direction it is going.” They also have identified Lawrence as “a relationship-based community requiring the building of long-term relationships and networks to be successful.”

With that in mind, perhaps, commissioners say they want to hire a city manager who is not a “resume builder,” “someone who is willing to stay, but also willing to take risks to improve the organization.” They want a manager who is “politically neutral, but actively engaged in the political process.”

So we want someone willing to build long-term relationships in a community that isn’t comfortable with itself. We want him or her to be politically engaged, but not political. And we want someone who wants to stay in the job for a long time but also is willing to take the kind of risks that might well lead commissioners to show him or her the door.

OK.

It probably wasn’t easy for commissioners to reach consensus on exactly what they are seeking in a new city manager, but what they ended up with seems to raise a number of red flags for someone who might be interested in the Lawrence job.

Among the “strongly preferred” qualifications for the job is a minimum of 10 years experience leading “a comparable organization.” Maybe someone who’s been a city manager for that long won’t be intimidated by the Lawrence commission’s idea of an “ideal candidate.”

One of the interesting challenges of being a city or county administrator is that his or her bosses change every few years. An administrator who shows leadership on one commission’s agenda, may end up at odds with the goals of the next commission. Trying to position oneself as a “leader” (a word city commissioners are repeating often in reference to their search), with one commission might be the kiss of death for a manager after the next election.

So, are we asking too much? According to the commissioners, we want “a consensus builder,” “a pragmatic thinker,” “a strategic thinker,” “a strong communicator,” “a mature leader” and “an accessible team leader.” All for $125,000 a year.

It’s not wrong to reach for the best possible candidate, someone who will provide strong, collaborative leadership for the city. Commissioners have set a lofty standard, as they should, but they may need to add a clothing allowance to the budget to help pay for those red capes.