Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Performance Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nolensville commissioners narrow focus to a few KPIs for Town Manager, prioritize capital-project tracking
Summary
At a Sept. 29 special meeting, the Town of Nolensville Board of Commissioners discussed establishing a short list of measurable KPIs for Town Manager Victor, emphasizing capital improvement execution, fiscal measures and clearer assignment of resolutions and ordinances to departments; the board agreed to refine wording and revisit the items at an October work session.
The Town of Nolensville Board of Commissioners on Sept. 29 agreed to narrow and refine a proposed set of key performance indicators (KPIs) for Town Manager Victor, focusing the initial set on fiscal responsibility and capital project tracking and asking staff to return with finalized wording at the board’s October work session.
The move followed a presentation from Victor, who told commissioners he searched municipal sources and national associations for examples and found few consistent models. “I spent quite a bit of time trying to just, you know, doing this the typical Google search on KPIs… I cannot find anything else written out there on it,” Victor said, and noted he had used ChatGPT to help draft potential measures. He cautioned that KPIs must be “readily measurable” and not create an extra workload that drives staff to “manage the KPIs instead of managing the organization.”
Why it matters: Commissioners said a short, measurable dashboard would help hold the town accountable while limiting staff burden. The mayor asked that each resolution and ordinance be assigned to a responsible department rather than left as a catch-all for the Town Manager, and urged that the dashboard make clear which staff member is the point person for each project.
Board members homed in on a small group of priorities. The mayor said the goal should be a suite of three to five KPIs; after discussion the board coalesced around refining four indicators from the draft list (referred to at the meeting as items 3, 4, 9 and 11) and bringing the finalized language back for a formal vote at the October work session. Those items fall broadly under fiscal responsibility (budget execution, reserve compliance, audit findings) and capital improvement project execution.
Commissioners also pressed for better visuals and data access. One commissioner proposed “an internal whiteboard so that each department is given a color code” to show project stage and responsibility; others suggested a Gantt-style progress chart and greater integration or permission settings in the town’s ClearGov module so board members could see update dates, project leads and links to related resolutions and budget entries.
On employee matters, several commissioners supported an employee engagement or satisfaction survey and asked the Town Manager to review the organizational chart to determine whether too many direct reports were assigned to him. “I would like to know about employee engagement. I would like to see a satisfaction survey,” one commissioner said, urging that staff voice be included in evaluations. Commissioners emphasized that the engagement survey and chart review would inform whether additional staff or reassignments were required, but they agreed those items would not be treated as KPIs.
Next steps: The board directed staff to refine the wording of the selected KPIs and return with a draft for the October work session. The meeting concluded with a routine motion to adjourn that was seconded and approved by voice vote.
Notes on attribution: Quotes and specific proposals in this article are attributed to speakers recorded in the meeting transcript as Mayor (S1), Town Manager Victor (S3), David Windrow (S2, citizen commenter) and commissioners appearing as the meeting record labels them (S4–S8). Unattributed descriptions summarize discussion where multiple participants contributed and no single speaker made a declarative statement.
