Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates format and timeline for library director evaluation
Summary
Trustees reviewed a proposed director-evaluation form and discussed methods, timeline and whether to require a self-evaluation. The board agreed to refine the form and aim for an evaluation this fall if possible, while noting the short timetable.
Trustees discussed a draft director-evaluation form intended to guide an annual performance review of Library Director Michael Blackwell and debated evaluation methods, timeline and whether the director should submit a self-evaluation.
Why it matters: The evaluation informs feedback and potential salary decisions, and trustees said they want a durable process that future boards can use while avoiding an overly cumbersome or subjective exercise.
Board member Michael Dunn explained the draft: trustees would rate the director on essential job functions on a three-point scale, provide comments and Jim Hanley or Dunn would synthesize results for discussion with the director. Dunn suggested the director submit a self-evaluation to allow apples-to-apples comparison; some trustees opposed self-evaluations as potentially counterproductive. Members suggested adding clear, measurable goals and limiting verbosity.
Timing: Trustees said completing a full evaluation before any year-end pay decisions would require finalizing the form and collecting input in October so results could be collated by November. Several trustees proposed instead developing a refined methodology to apply in 2026 while conducting a lighter interim review for 2025.
Next steps: Dunn will produce a revised draft and circulate it; trustees asked for clearer, concrete objectives to be included and requested that the director provide a list of annual goals to compare against evaluation results.
Ending: The board agreed to continue the discussion by email and aimed to finalize a process in time for a fall review if feasible.
