The market assessment unveiled during a strategy meeting hosted by the Paris Economic Development Corporation last week had a lot of data indicating Paris has a ton of potential when it comes to attracting retail development.

The most fascinating part of the presentation from Rickey Hayes of Retail Attractions, in my opinion, involved what Paris needed to do in order to realize that vast potential.

Simply put, and I'm paraphrasing here of course, we need to get our act together, and we need to do it quickly.

In today's economic environment, Hayes said, Paris is not just competing for projects with surrounding towns like Hugo or Bonham, not anymore. Now, when investors are considering Paris, he said, they are comparing it to places like Southlake and Frisco - and about 200 or 300 other towns just like Paris.

"We need to be a place where investors tell other investors how easy it is to deal with Paris," Hayes said.

And if we are being realistic - which Hayes indicated was another important aspect of the economic development process - does anyone believe those are the types of discussions being held between investors about Paris, Texas right now?

Or is it more likely - given factors like the revolving door in the city manager's position, the high turnover rate on the council itself, the lack of flexibility City Hall has a reputation for when it comes to new business development - that potential investors are saying it is more like pulling teeth to deal with Paris, Texas?

I hope not, but if so, those investors are going to take a harder look at the other 200 or 300 cities just like Paris they are considering instead.

Not good.

According to Hayes, there are four kinds of cities he has seen during his many years in economic development:

• There are "yes cities" that have a can do attitude and figure out ways to get deals done.
• There are "no cities" that don't want more growth because they don't want to have to provide the additional services that comes along with it.
• There are the "who cares cities" that think if growth comes great, but we aren't going to work for it because if it doesn't come, that's fine too.
• Then there are the "no cities that could be yes cities" but just need the right kind of leadership to get them there.

When Hayes said he thought Paris was a "yes city," it was the first time all day I didn't find myself nodding in agreement. Everything he described, to me, pegged Paris as a "no city that could be a yes city," because so many of the obstacles he cited to our economic growth went back to leadership and unity.

"Political instability stops retail growth," Hayes said. "Paris has everything except unity. If we can't keep people in leadership roles long enough to get the vision cast, we won't get anywhere."

I don't think Hayes was taking a shot at the quality of the leadership in Paris, and neither am I. But I think his comments, which to some degree mirror those of now former city manager Kevin Carruth, go to the need to have our quality leaders in place long enough to make decisions about the city's future and then follow through with them.

"Everyone wants the fruit," Hayes said. "But before you can have fruit you have to have a tree with some deep roots."

We've got to start putting down those roots. We've got to get to the point where investors see us as a "yes city."

If we do, Hayes has plenty of data that indicates the sky is the limit.