Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Regular City Council Meeting <br />December 28, 2006 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />C. That the City Council of the City of Paris has lost confidence in the ability ofthe City <br />Manager of the City of Paris, Tony Williams, to provide the level of leadership <br />necessary to achieve the desired goals and objectives ofthe City Council, and that the <br />Council's actions should be construed as a vote of no confidence in Mr. Williams. <br /> <br />After outlining the procedures to be followed during the public hearing, Mayor Manning <br />opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Tony Williams stated that he asked for the public hearing on the merits of the charges <br />of his termination. Tony thanked the City Council for giving him the opportunity to work in <br />Paris. He said he never questioned the authority of the City Council to terminate the position <br />of City Manager. Tony stated the differences they had were not about his work product, but <br />about their relationship. <br /> <br />Tony Williams responded to the first charge of "Keeps Council Informed," by stating <br />the evaluation score was 2.4. He further stated they evaluated him on thirty-eight criteria and <br />2.5 was considered to be a good score. He scored above 2.5 on thirty-seven of the criteria and <br />scored a 2.4 on one ofthe criteria. Tony said he did not think all ofthose who rated him low, <br />gave him a valid evaluation and to score him low was without merit. He stated it was hard to <br />understand why he was scored low on controlling costs. He said there had been improvement <br />in the financials from December 2004 through the present. When he was hired as the City <br />Manager, the City was in the hole a million dollars and was having to use it's bond money to <br />make payroll. <br /> <br />Tony stated the second charge as follows: "Through prior written evaluations, the City <br />Council had informed the City Manager to improve his communication with the Council <br />Members, but that the City Manager did not do so." The charge further read that he could not <br />work with the newly elected City Council. Tony told Council he had offered to them to make <br />changes to improve the communications. He said there was not a prior written evaluation other <br />than the fall of 2005, and the majority was fine with his communication. He also said that <br />there was no counseling offered to him after the 2005 evaluation. With regard to the newly <br />elected City Council, Tony said that after the election had taken place Mr. Ray went to city <br />employees and told him that Council was going to get them a new boss. He further stated that <br />if a Council would not support a manager and stop that kind of conduct, he did not know any <br />professional that would want to work under those circumstances. <br /> <br />Tony stated the third charge as a "Loss of Confidence" issue. He responded by giving <br />Council a list of accomplishments and stated as a result of same, Council should have <br />confidence in him. He said the financial numbers were not his numbers, but those of the <br />auditor. He said the City had a history of spending more than it was taking in and depleting it's <br />reserves. He stated that he made a plan, went to Council and Council had to make hard <br />decisions. Tony further stated that the cash current was about eight-million dollars, a <br /> <br />'T <br />