HomeMy Public PortalAbout01-24-22 Agenda Work Session
101 E. Orange St., PO Box 429, Hillsborough, NC 27278
919-732-1270 | www.hillsboroughnc.gov | @HillsboroughGov
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA | 1 of 1
Agenda
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Remote work session
7 p.m. Jan. 24, 2022
Virtual meeting via YouTube Live
Town of Hillsborough YouTube channel
Due to current public health concerns, this meeting will be conducted remotely
using Zoom.
Please use the bookmark feature to navigate and view the item attachments.
1. Opening of the work session
2. Agenda changes and approval
3. Appointments
Tourism Development Authority — Reappointment of Dani Black for a term ending Jan. 31, 2023
4. Items for decision ― consent agenda
A. Miscellaneous budget amendments and transfers
B. Community Development Block Grant-Coronavirus annual report 2021 and revised quarterly reports
5. In-depth discussion and topics
A. Letter of interest for contiguous annexation – Cates Creek Parkway
B. Letter of interest for satellite annexation – NC 86 North
C. Letter of interest for satellite annexation – Lawrence Road
D. One Orange Countywide Racial Equity Framework
E. Police and Employee Market Pay Issues
6. Other business
7. Committee updates and reports
8. Adjournment
Interpreter services or special sound equipment for compliance with the American with Disabilities Act is available
on request. If you are disabled and need assistance with reasonable accommodations, call the Town Clerk’s Office
at 919-296-9443 a minimum of one business day in advance of the meeting.
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 1 of 1
Agenda Abstract
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Meeting date: Jan. 24, 2022
Department: Planning & Econ Dev.
Public hearing: No
Date of public hearing: N/A
PRESENTER/INFORMATION CONTACT
Shannan Campbell, Planning & Economic Development Manager
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED
Subject: Tourism Development Authority — Reappointment of Dani Black for a term ending Jan. 31, 2023
Attachments:
Dani Black’s original application
Brief summary:
Ms. Black operates an AirBnB in her residence and AirBnB is collecting and remitting occupancy tax on behalf of
their users. At the Jan. 6, 2022, TDA meeting the TDA voted unanimously to reappoint Ms. Black to a seat reserved
for “individuals who are affiliated with businesses that collect the tax in the town”.
Action requested:
Reappointment of Dani Black to the Tourism Development Authority for a term ending Jan. 31, 2023.
ISSUE OVERVIEW
Background information and issue summary:
None
Financial impacts:
None
Staff recommendation and comments:
None
For clerk’s use
AGENDA ITEM:
3
Consent
agenda
Regular
agenda
Closed
session
Advisory Board Application
If you are a Town of Hillsborough resident and willing to volunteer your time and expertise to your community, please
complete this form. Volunteers for the Parks and Recreation Board must be at least 13 years old, and volunteers for all
other boards must be at least 18 years old.
Name:
dani black
Home address:
110 collins avenue
Work phone number:
919-960-1331
Email address:
daniblack@biggertables.com
Place of employment:
bigger tables consulting and piedmont community college/orange corrrectional center
Job title:
consultant, chef, instructor
Birth date:
June 5, 1965
Gender:
Female
Ethnic origin:
Caucasian
Boards you would be willing to serve on:
First choice — Tourism Development Authority
Reasons for wanting to serve:
I'm interested to participate in how our town is using the collected tax to bring more hospitality trade to Hillsborough.
Have you served or are you currently serving on a town board? If so, which ones and when?
Many years ago when I owned a restaurant downtown, served on the Tourism Board.
Relevant work, volunteer or educational experience:
I've worked in the culinary and hospitality fields almost all my life, and several years ago added small business
entrepreneurship consulting to that work. I enjoy the intersections of building connections between businesses and
welcoming and feeding visitors!
Have served with local organizations working to improve our communities (OCIM, Local Re-Entry Council, Food
Council Local Food Economy workgroup, etc.)
How are you connected to Hillsborough (live, work, play, shop, own property)?
Have owned a home and lived here for over 20 years, raised two kids, owned four businesses (still have one). I live,
work, play, learn, eat, do whatever I can in the town I love : )
Have you reviewed the Vision 2030 plan, and what are your thoughts about it?
I've read bits of it, but didn't make time for all of it before.
I trust and am grateful for the work of the people who've developed it.
Now that I'm throwing my name in this hat, I will sit down and review in detail to see what piece this board has in the
overall picture.
Have you reviewed other town documents (budget, strategy map, small area plans), and what are your thoughts
about them?
Have read many over the years. It can be overwhelming, as a citizen (or even, I imagine, as a Town worker or board
member) to stay on top of all! I'm super-grateful for the work the Town does to get this information out there to people
in a timely and appealing fashion.
It's awesome to have access to so much material for planning purposes.
What challenges do you see the town facing that could be addressed by the board or boards on which you wish
to serve?
Hillsborough is facing challenges of growing wisely while maintaining its unique, important, lovely character and
vibrant, connected community. If there are tensions or challenges in the community, I see them all going back to that,
which is at its root, an abundance of blessings.
The town and surrounding area have so many gifts of resources, including people, that the work seems to be how best
to use these for the good of all.
I'm encouraged by the great work of employees and volunteers in many inter-related areas, and will enjoy an
opportunity to work on one tiny piece of the picture.
How you heard about this opportunity:
Other
Agreement:
3 I have been advised that I am committing to attend the volunteer board's regular meetings. Attendance at the regular
meetings shall be considered a prerequisite for maintaining membership on the board. The Board of Commissioners
may declare a vacancy on the board because of non-attendance.
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 1 of 1
Agenda Abstract
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Meeting date: Jan. 24, 2022
Department: Administration
Public hearing: No
Date of public hearing: N/A
PRESENTER/INFORMATION CONTACT
Emily Bradford, Budget Director
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED
Subject: Miscellaneous budget amendments and transfers
Attachments:
Budget Changes Detail Report
Brief summary:
To adjust budgeted revenues and expenditures, where needed, due to changes that have occurred since budget
adoption.
Action requested:
Consider approving budget amendments and transfers.
ISSUE OVERVIEW
Background information and issue summary:
N/A
Financial impacts:
As indicated by each budget amendment.
Staff recommendation and comments:
To approve the attached list of budget amendments.
For clerk’s use
AGENDA ITEM:
4.A
Consent
agenda
Regular
agenda
Closed
session
BUDGET CHANGES REPORT
TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
FY 2021-2022
DATES: 01/24/2022 TO 01/24/2022
REFERENCE NUMBER DATE BUDGET CHANGE BUDGET
ORIGINAL BUDGET AMENDEDCHANGE
USER
10-00-9990-5300-000 CONTINGENCY
01/24/2022 400,000.00 -2,100.00To cover FY22 vehicle allowance 24185 195,608.00EBRADFORD
01/24/2022 400,000.00 -2,500.00To cover cost of respirator masks 24186 193,108.00JDELLAVALL
01/24/2022 400,000.00 -2,331.00To cover costs of respirator masks 24190 190,777.00EBRADFORD
01/24/2022 400,000.00 -5,187.00To cover utility analysis to yr-end 24195 185,590.00EBRADFORD
01/24/2022 400,000.00 -16,000.00To cover Class & Pay Study 24224 169,590.00EBRADFORD
10-10-4100-5300-041 ATTORNEY FEES
01/24/2022 125,000.00 2.00To cover legal overage 24175 129,648.00EBRADFORD
10-10-4100-5300-570 MISCELLANEOUS
01/24/2022 5,000.00 -2.00To cover legal overage 24176 2,513.00EBRADFORD
10-10-4200-5300-454 C.S.-CATV/ASCAP-BMI/COD/TRANS/PAY S
01/24/2022 80,424.00 16,000.00To cover Class & Pay Study 24225 105,060.02EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5100-020 SALARIES
01/24/2022 0.00 45,000.00To move from Public Space 24204 45,000.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5120-050 FICA
01/24/2022 0.00 3,443.00To move from Public Space 24205 3,443.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5125-060 HOSPITALIZATION
01/24/2022 0.00 11,060.00To move from Public Space 24206 11,060.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5125-061 LIFE/DISABILITY/VISION
01/24/2022 0.00 300.00To move from Public Space 24207 300.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5125-062 DENTAL INSURANCE
01/24/2022 0.00 393.00To move from Public Space 24208 393.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5127-070 RETIREMENT
01/24/2022 0.00 5,130.00To move from Public Space 24209 5,130.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5127-071 401(K) RETIREMENT SUPP.
01/24/2022 0.00 2,250.00To move from Public Space 24210 2,250.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5300-080 TRAINING/CONF/CONV
01/24/2022 0.00 1,500.00To move from Public Space 24213 1,500.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5300-310 GASOLINE
01/24/2022 0.00 1,500.00To move from Public Space 24216 1,500.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5300-330 SUPPLIES - DEPARTMENTAL
01/24/2022 0.00 1,500.00To move from Public Space 24215 1,500.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5300-530 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
01/24/2022 0.00 100.00To move from Public Space 24214 100.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5300-570 MISCELLANEOUS
01/24/2022 0.00 1,500.00To move from Public Space 24221 1,500.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5300-583 MISC-TAX, TAGS, ETC.
01/24/2022 0.00 1,200.00To move from Public Space 24220 1,200.00EBRADFORD
10-10-5000-5700-740 CAPITAL - VEHICLES
01/24/2022 0.00 24,000.00To move from Public Space 24218 24,000.00EBRADFORD
10-10-6300-5100-021 PERSONNEL EXPANSION - SALARIES
01/24/2022 67,576.00 -67,576.00To move to Facilities budget 24196 0.00EBRADFORD
10-10-6300-5300-600 PERSONNEL EXPANSION - OP COSTS
EBRADFORD 8:42:52AM01/19/2022
fl142r03
Page 1 of 2
GF-
Contingency
Governing
Body
Governing
Body
Admin.
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Town Hall
Campus
Public
Space
Public
Space
BUDGET CHANGES REPORT
TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
FY 2021-2022
DATES: 01/24/2022 TO 01/24/2022
REFERENCE NUMBER DATE BUDGET CHANGE BUDGET
ORIGINAL BUDGET AMENDEDCHANGE
USER
01/24/2022 9,300.00 -9,300.00To move to Facilities budget 24211 0.00EBRADFORD
10-10-6300-5700-740 CAPITAL - VEHICLES
01/24/2022 24,000.00 -24,000.00To move to Facilities 24222 0.00EBRADFORD
10-10-6600-5300-330 SUPPLIES - DEPARTMENTAL
01/24/2022 750.00 2,500.00To cover cost of respirator masks 24187 3,250.00JDELLAVALL
01/24/2022 750.00 2,331.00To cover costs of respirator masks 24191 5,581.00EBRADFORD
10-10-6610-5300-140 TRAVEL/VEHICLE ALLOTMENT
01/24/2022 1,800.00 2,100.00To cover FY22 vehicle allowance 24184 3,900.00EBRADFORD
10-10-6610-5300-338 SUPPLIES - DATA PROCESSING
01/24/2022 112,000.00 2,000.00To move from Public Space 24223 117,279.84EBRADFORD
10-30-5550-5300-490 C.S./ALARM
01/24/2022 2,500.00 410.00To cover overage 24173 3,276.00EBRADFORD
10-30-5550-5300-570 MISCELLANEOUS
01/24/2022 1,000.00 -410.00To cover overage 24174 590.00EBRADFORD
10-60-6900-5300-475 C.S./UTILITY ANALYSIS
01/24/2022 5,000.00 5,187.00To cover utility analysis to yr-end 24194 10,187.00EBRADFORD
30-80-8220-5300-130 UTILITIES
01/24/2022 151,218.00 -3,500.00To cover fuel 24192 147,718.00EBRADFORD
30-80-8220-5300-310 GASOLINE
01/24/2022 3,992.00 3,500.00To cover fuel 24193 7,492.00EBRADFORD
0.00
EBRADFORD 8:42:52AM01/19/2022
fl142r03
Page 2 of 2
Public
Space
Safety &
Risk Mgmt
IT
IT
Fleet
Maint.
Fleet
Maint.
Special
Approp.
WWTP
WWTP
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 1 of 1
Agenda Abstract
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Meeting date: Jan. 24, 2022
Department: Planning
Public hearing: No
Date of public hearing: N/A
PRESENTER/INFORMATION CONTACT
Margaret A. Hauth, Assistant Town Manager
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED
Subject: Community Development Block Grant-Coronavirus annual report 2021 and revised quarterly reports
Attachments:
1.2021 Annual Report
2. 2021 Quarter 3 report (July -Sept.) and Quarter 4 report (Oct. – Dec.)
Brief summary:
An annual report is required to be provided to the elected board and submitted to the state prior to January 31 of
each year. That report is attached. Corrected quarterly reports are also attached to align with standard quarters,
rather than beginning with our expenditure approval in August. Staff was unclear on the alignment previously.
Action requested:
Receive reports.
ISSUE OVERVIEW
Background information and issue summary:
Financial impacts:
Staff recommendation and comments:
For clerk’s use
AGENDA ITEM:
4.B
Consent
agenda
Regular
agenda
Closed
session
Margaret Hauth
Preparer Information
Margaret Hauth
Contractor Info
Fair Housing Report
LAP Report
Section 3 Form
Section 504 Report
Activity Indicators
Other Indicators
NC COMMERCE - RURAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICE USE ONLY
Documents Included:
Coversheet
Main Summary
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
STATE ADMINISTERED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
2021 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT COVER PAGE
Hillsborough, NCGrantee Name:
919-296-9471
Grant Number:
Grants Management Representative:
Grantee Address:
Name:
Address:
Telephone Number:
20-V-3528
101 East Orange Street, Hillsborough, NC 27278 | Mailing: P.O. Box 429, Hillsborough, NC 27278
Local Government Primary Contact:
Phone Number:
Email:
Email Address:
Margaret Hauth
P.O. Box 429, Hillsborough, NC 27278
919-296-9471
margaret.hauth@hillsboroughnc.gov
margaret.hauth@hillsboroughnc.gov
The Annual Performance Report (APR) is required by 4 NCAC 19L.1101. One original signed hardcopy of this report
must be submitted to NC Commerce by Monday, January 31, 2022. The grant recipient's Board Designated
Representative certifies on this signatory Cover Page that all the Data in the APR Report are true and correct to the best of
her/his knowledge and belief.
Jenn Weaver, Mayor, Town of Hillsborough
Typed Name of Authorized Representative
Signature and Date of Authorized Representative
Grantee:Contents CheckAcquisitionArchitectural BarriersClearance ActivitiesCode EnforcementDispositionFire ProtectionFlood & DrainageHistoric PreservationMachinery & EquipmentNeighborhood FacilitiesOther ActivitiesOther Public FacilitiesParking FacilitiesParks & PlaygroundsPedestrian ImprovementsPublic ServicesXPublic UtilitiesRehabilitation, CommercialRehabilitation, PrivateRehabilitation, PublicRelocation AssistanceSenior Handicapped CentersSewer ImprovementsSolid Waste FacilitiesStreet ImprovementsWater and SewerWater ImprovementsWorking CapitalContractor InformationRequisitions Paid between 01/01/2021 and 12/31/2021:$7,258.52PlanningState Office Use OnlyBudgeted :Main SummaryHillsborough, NC Grant Number : 20-V-3528Note: Reconstruction activities, Clearance activities related to Rehabilitation and Temporary Relocation related to Rehabilitation should all be classified under Rehabilitation.An Activity Indicator Form or Other Indicators Form are not required for Administration or Planning. Please provided the requested information below:AdministrationState Office Use OnlyBudgeted : $60,000.00Requisitions Paid between 01/01/2021 and 12/31/2021:
2021 Annual Performance Report
Activity Indicators
Grantee: Hillsborough, NC Check (X) C-1:
Project Name: Emergency Housing Assistance Check (X) E-1:
Grant Number: 20-V-3528 Check (X) L-1:
Housing Program Indicators
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Housing Activities
Single Units -Rental
Total number of rental units acquired
Total number of rental units cleared
Total number of rental units disposed
Total number of rental households relocated
Total number of rental units rehabilitated
Number of units brought from substandard to standard condition (NC Rehab Standards)
Number of units brought into compliance with the lead safe housing rule (24 CFR part 35)
Number of units occupied by elderly (62 years of age or above)
Single Units - Owner
Total number of owner units acquired
Total number of owner units cleared
Total number of owner units disposed
Total number of owner households relocated
Total number of owner occupied units rehabilitated
Number of units brought from substandard to standard condition (NC Rehab Standards)
Number of units brought into compliance with the lead safe housing rule (24 CFR part 35)
Number of units occupied by elderly (62 years of age or above)
Multi-Units Rental
Total number of rental units acquired
Total number of rental units cleared
Total number of rental units disposed
Total number of rental households relocated
Total number of rental units rehabilitated
Number of units brought from substandard to standard condition (NC Rehab Standards)
Number of units brought into compliance with the lead safe housing rule (24 CFR part 35)
Number of units occupied by elderly (62 years of age or above)
Development of Single-Family Housing
Total number of owner units created
Number of affordable units created
Development of Multi-Unit Rental Housing
Total number of rental units created
Activity Name, Number and Code: Select from Dropdown list below
Amount of money leveraged for the activity, if applicable (Funds other than CDBG fund as
part of activity.)
(Proposed is for entire grant activity, Actual is only for the year 2021.)
2021 Annual Performance Report
Activity Indicators
Total number of rental units rehabilitated
Number of affordable units created
Number of units Section 504 accessible (includes adaptable units)
Number of units brought into compliance with the lead safe housing rule (24 CFR part 35)
Number of units created through conversion of nonresidential building to residential
Number of units meeting IBC (International Building Code)
Of IBC, number of units meeting Energy Star
Number of units occupied by elderly (62 years of age or above)
Number of units subsidized with project-based rental assistance (fed., state, or local)
Number of years affordability guaranteed
Number of units designated for persons with HIV/AIDS
of these, number of units designated for the chronically homeless
of these, number of units 504 accessible
Number of units of permanent housing for homeless persons
of these, number of units designated for the chronically homeless
of these, number of units 504 accessible
Homeownership Indicators
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Number of units occupied by first-time homebuyers
Total number of units assisted through home buyer financial assistance
Number of first-time home buyers assisted financially
Number of first-time home buyers receiving housing counseling
Number of minority first-time home buyers receiving housing counseling
Number served receiving down-payment assistance and/or assistance with closing costs
Number of subsidized mortgages provided
Economic Development Program Indicators
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Number of facades/business building rehab
Number of jobs to be created part-time
Number of jobs to be created full-time
Number of jobs to be retained part-time
Number of jobs to be retained full-time
Number of jobs created with employer sponsored health care
Number of jobs retained with employer sponsored health care
Status:
Full or Part-time:
Jobs (By EDA Job Category Definitions)
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Official and Managers
Professional
Technicians
Sales
Office and Clerical
Craft Workers (skilled)
Operatives (semi-skilled)
Laborers (unskilled)
Service Workers
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Number of unemployed persons getting jobs in FTE's (Full-Time Equivalent)
Number of new businesses assisted
Number of existing businesses assisted
Number of business expansions
Number of business relocations
Prior employment status before taking job created (full-time employed, part-time employed or unemployed)
2021 Annual Performance Report
Activity Indicators
Business DUNS #
Two Digit NAICS Classification Number (http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/index.html)
Non-Economic Development Public Facility Program Indicators
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Number of persons assisted
Number of persons assisted with new access to a public facility
Number of persons assisted with improved access to a public facility
Number of persons assisted where public facility quality was improved
Non-Economic Development Public Infrastructure Program Indicators
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Water
Number of persons assisted
Number of persons assisted with new access to public water
Number of persons assisted with improved access to public water
Number of persons assisted where public water quality was improved
Sewer
Number of persons assisted
Number of persons assisted with new access to public sewer
Number of persons assisted with improved access to public sewer
Number of persons assisted where public sewer quality was improved
Streets
Number of persons assisted
Number of persons assisted with new access to public streets
Number of persons assisted with improved access to public streets
Number of persons assisted where public street quality was improved
Drainage
Number of persons assisted
Number of persons assisted with new access to public drainage
Number of persons assisted with improved access to public drainage
Number of persons assisted where public drainage quality was improved
Sidewalks
Number of persons assisted
Number of persons assisted with new access to public sidewalks
Number of persons assisted with improved access to public sidewalks
Number of persons assisted where public sidewalk quality was improved
Other Public Infrastructure List:
Number of persons assisted
Number of persons assisted with new access to public sidewalks
Number of persons assisted with improved access to public sidewalks
Number of persons assisted where public sidewalk quality was improved
Public Service Program Indicators
Number of persons assisted 84 108
Number of persons with new access to service 84 43
Number of persons with improved access to service 84 108
Number of persons where service quality was improved 84 108
Brownfield Projects
Number of square acres of brownfields remediated
Comments
Considered "new access" for individuals who listed no prior emergency housing assistance from non-profit, town, county, or state sources
during calendar year.
If more than 2 DUNS Numbers, add in
Comments Section.
2021 Annual Performance Report
Other Indicators: Accomplishments and Beneficiaries
Grantee:Check (X) C-1:
Project Name: Check (X) E-1:
Grant Number:Check (X) L-1:
Check Box
Units
Households
Persons X
General Information
Square Feet
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Properties
Households Benefiting
Total Jobs
Hillsborough, NC
Emergency Housing Assistance
Activity Name, Number and Code: Select from Dropdown list below
Budgeted $540,000.00$
20-V-3528
Actual $72,585.15$
Linear Feet
Rental Units
One to One Replacement
Displacements
594 accessible units
Elderly
Female-Head of Household
Census Data (http://www.census.gov/) or
(https://data.census.gov/cedsci/)
Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
County Code
Census Tract
Block Groups
Block Groups
Block Groups
Block Groups
Census Tract
Income Levels Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)Please Select One: ___Households _X__Persons
Extremely Low
Low
97 (89.8%)
11 (10.2%)
Non-Low/Moderate
Total 108 (100%)
Moderate
2021 Annual Performance Report
Other Indicators: Accomplishments and Beneficiaries
Owner Total Hispanic Total Hispanic
11 White
12 Black/African American 13
13 Asian
14 American Indian/Alaskan Native
15 Native Hawaii/Other Pacific Islander
16 American Indian/Alaskan Native & White
17 Asian & White
18 Black/African American &White
19 Amer. Indian/Alaskan Native & Black/African Amer.
4
Renter Total Hispanic Total Hispanic
11 White 12
12 Black/African American 65
13 Asian 4
14 American Indian/Alaskan Native
15 Native Hawaii/Other Pacific Islander
16 American Indian/Alaskan Native & White
17 Asian & White
18 Black/African American &White
19 Amer. Indian/Alaskan Native & Black/African Amer.
6 6
Comments: If you are designating the number of households, how many households are in each unit and how many persons per household.
One household of 4 did not provide racial or ethnic information.
Total number of low and moderate income universe
Total number of low and moderate income in service area
Race Code Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)
Please Select One: ___Households _X__Persons
Race Code Proposed
(For Entire Grant)
Actual
(2021)Please Select One: ___Households ___Persons
20 Other multi-racial
20 Other multi-racial
Survey Data
Percent of low and moderate income in service area
Contractor Information 2021
Hispanic Non-Hispanic
Name Street City State Zip
NOTE : Please see instructions for Type of Trade Code and Race/Ethnic Code
Orange County 300 W Tryon St Hillsborough NC 27278 Non-Construction 4 56-6000327 $60,000.00 06/02/21 11 White
Female OwnedMinority OwnedSection 3 FirmGrantee: __Hillsborough, NC_______________________________________________Grant Number: _20-V-3528_________________
Contractor Name and Address
Construction/ Non-Construction Type of Trade CodeFederal IDContract Amount Execution DateRace/Ethnicity Code
Quarterly Report
Community Development Block Grant-Coronavirus
No. 20-V-3528
Emergency Housing Assistance
Quarter: 3 (July 1 - September 31, 2021)
$48,435.86
Payments for Hillsborough Residents: $44,032.60
$4,403.26
15
Average Amount of Assistance Per Household:$2,935.51
Applicant Race Count % of Total Applicant Ethnicity Count % of Total
Asian 0 0.0%Hispanic and/or Latinx 6 13.6%
Black/African American 27 61.4%Not Hispanic and/or Latinx 30 68.2%
Multiracial/Other 6 13.6%Unknown 8 18.2%
White/Caucasian 7 15.9%44 100.0%
Unknown 4 9.1%
44 100.0%
% of Total
86.7%
13.3%
0.0%
100.0%
% of Total Funds Disbursed
27.7%
Rent Payments (Arrears)50.2%
0.2%
9.7%
4.8%
7.4%
100.0%
Expense Type
Rent Payments (Current and/or Future)$12,212.00
Rent Deposits/Fees/Bond
$22,124.95
$106.00
Mortgage Payments (Arrears)$3,238.00
$44,032.60
This quarterly report was received and reviewed by the Hillsborough Board of Commissioners on the __________ day of
Mayor
Amount
15
DEMOGRAPHICS
Household Income Count
30% AMI 13
50% AMI 2
ASSISTANCE PROVIDED
Utility/Internet Payments $4,257.65
_____________________ 2022.
Mortgage Payments (Current / Future)$2,094.00
Total Amount of Funds Disbursed:
Administration Costs:
Number of Households Assisted:
60% AMI 0
Quarterly Report
Community Development Block Grant-Coronavirus
No. 20-V-3528
Emergency Housing Assistance
Quarter: 4 (Oct. 1 - Dec. 31, 2021)
$31,407.81
Payments for Hillsborough Residents: $28,552.55
$2,855.26
22
Average Amount of Assistance Per Household:$1,297.84
Applicant Race Count % of Total Applicant Ethnicity Count % of Total
Asian 4 6.3%Hispanic and/or Latinx 0 0.0%
Black/African American 51 79.7%Not Hispanic and/or Latinx 64 100.0%
Multiracial/Other 4 6.3%Unknown 0 0.0%
White/Caucasian 5 7.8%64 100.0%
Unknown 0 0.0%
64 100.0%
% of Total
95.5%
4.5%
0.0%
100.0%
% of Total Funds Disbursed
29.9%
Rent Payments (Arrears)28.8%
4.5%
11.6%
13.6%
11.6%
100.0%
Expense Type
Rent Payments (Current and/or Future)$8,532.00
Rent Deposits/Fees/Bond
$8,220.00
$1,298.50
Mortgage Payments (Arrears)$3,323.26
$28,552.55
This quarterly report was received and reviewed by the Hillsborough Board of Commissioners on the __________ day of
Mayor
Amount
22
DEMOGRAPHICS
Household Income Count
30% AMI 21
50% AMI 1
ASSISTANCE PROVIDED
Utility/Internet Payments $3,306.25
_____________________ 2022.
Mortgage Payments (Current / Future)$3,872.54
Total Amount of Funds Disbursed:
Administration Costs:
Number of Households Assisted:
60% AMI 0
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 1 of 1
Agenda Abstract
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Meeting date: Jan. 24, 2022
Department: Planning & Econ Dev.
Public hearing: No
Date of public hearing: N/A
PRESENTER/INFORMATION CONTACT
Shannan Campbell, Planning & Economic Development Manager
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED
Subject: Letter of interest for contiguous annexation – Cates Creek Parkway
Attachments:
1. Letter
2. Parcel Map
Brief summary:
The parcel in question is approximately 60 acres, intersected by Cates Creek Parkway with frontage also on Old
NC86. A portion of the parcel is within the town’s ETJ and is zoned EDD (Economic Development District). The full
parcel is shown as part of the future land use plan as Mixed Use. Annexation would be contiguous.
Action requested:
None, direction needed.
ISSUE OVERVIEW
Background information and issue summary:
None
Financial impacts:
None
Staff recommendation and comments:
None
For clerk’s use
AGENDA ITEM:
5.A
Consent
agenda
Regular
agenda
Closed
session
Mr. Daniel J. Doyle
Senior Vice President and COO
The Beach Company
320 Broad Street, Suite 600
Charleston, SC 29401
January 17, 2022
Ms. Shannan Campbell, AICP, CZO
Planning and Economic Development Manager
Town of Hillsborough
101 E. Orange St.
Hillsborough, NC
RE: Moren Property | Letter of Intent and Annexation
Dear Ms. Campbell:
I am pleased to send you this Letter of Interest and Annexation regarding the property
identified by PIN# 1873153366 and known as the Moren Property, comprised of approximately
60 acres, and located at the intersection of Old NC 86 and Waterstone Dr. We are enthusiastic
about the prospect of developing this property and we are grateful for the opportunity to
discuss this with you at the January 24th Board of Commissioners meeting.
The purpose of this letter is to generally describe our vision for the property to the Board of
Commissioners and identify the specific uses we would like to include in the development, for
which we intend to pursue annexation and rezoning by the Town of Hillsborough. At this early
stage, we would like to understand the position of the Board and Town Staff regarding the
development of this site. Your opinions will help to guide our predevelopment process, verify
that our ideas are aligned with those of the Town’s, and inform our anticipated request for
rezoning and annexation.
Our current vision for the site includes neighborhood retail, office or medical office, and a
professionally managed and amenitized community of built-to-rent, single-family residences.
The retail and office uses would likely be concentrated at the northern and southern portions of
the site where vehicular access, visibility, and proximity to other existing complementary land
uses are greatest. The residential uses would likely occupy the middle portion of the site which
lacks primary street frontage. Priority will be given to pedestrian connectivity between uses,
walkable streets, engaging common areas, and contextual architecture and landscape design.
The residential community may have a potential mix of single-family, detached cottages and
attached townhomes to provide variety to prospective residents. The build-to-rent housing
model presents unique advantages to residents, combining the lifestyle benefits of a single-
family home with the attainability, convenience, and amenities of a professionally managed
multi-family community.
We look forward to speaking with you at the January 24th meeting and presenting our thoughts
and ideas. While we are early in the planning process, we are pleased to answer any questions
you have about our vision, our company, our track record and capabilities.
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Doyle
Senior Vice President and COO
cc: John D. Reyna Jr.
Development Associate
Cates Cree k Pkw y Pa rcel
Ja nua ry 18, 20 22
0 0.8 1.60.4 mi
0 1 20.5 km
1:48,0 00
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 1 of 1
Agenda Abstract
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Meeting date: Jan. 24, 2022
Department: Planning & Econ Dev.
Public hearing: No
Date of public hearing: N/A
PRESENTER/INFORMATION CONTACT
Shannan Campbell, Planning & Economic Development Manager
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED
Subject: Letter of interest for satellite annexation – NC 86 North
Attachments:
1. Letter
2. Parcel Map
Brief summary:
The parcel in question is approximately 78 Acres with frontage on NC 86 North. The parcel is not within the town’s
ETJ. The parcel is shown in the future land use plan as Mixed Residential Neighborhood. Annexation would be
satellite.
Action requested:
None, direction needed.
ISSUE OVERVIEW
Background information and issue summary:
None
Financial impacts:
None
Staff recommendation and comments:
None
For clerk’s use
AGENDA ITEM:
5.B
Consent
agenda
Regular
agenda
Closed
session
December 6, 2021
Shannan Campbell
Planning and Economic Development Manager
Town of Hillsborough
101 E. Orange St.
Hillsborough, NC 27278
RE: Annexation and/or Utility Extension for Orange County PIN: 9865878090
Good evening Shannan—
On behalf of NC 86 North LLC, I am formally requesting the Town of Hillsborough consider the
following two development options for the property identified by Orange County PIN
9865878090:
· Annexation of the subject property into the Town of Hillsborough and extension of
water and sewer utilities
· Extension of water and sewer utilities without annexation
Our client has an interest to develop the property into sixty-eight (68) single family lots
(20,000sf each) and 100,000sf warehouse flex and self-storage. I ask that this topic be placed
on the January agenda for consideration.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Regards,
Patrick Cummings, PE
Vice President
Summit Design and Engineering Services
NC86 Pa rcel
Ja nua ry 18, 20 22
0 0.8 1.60.4 mi
0 1 20.5 km
1:48,0 00
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 1 of 1
Agenda Abstract
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Meeting date: Jan. 24, 2022
Department: Planning & Econ Dev.
Public hearing: No
Date of public hearing: N/A
PRESENTER/INFORMATION CONTACT
Shannan Campbell, Planning & Economic Development Manager
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED
Subject: Letter of interest for satellite annexation – Lawrence Road
Attachments:
1. Letter
2. Parcel Map
Brief summary:
The parcel in question is approximately 85 Acres with frontage on Lawrence Road and Hwy 70-A. The parcel is not
within the town’s ETJ. The parcel is shown in the future land use plan as Mixed Residential Neighborhood.
Annexation would be satellite.
Action requested:
None, direction needed.
ISSUE OVERVIEW
Background information and issue summary:
None
Financial impacts:
None
Staff recommendation and comments:
None
For clerk’s use
AGENDA ITEM:
5.C
Consent
agenda
Regular
agenda
Closed
session
December 6, 2021
Shannan Campbell
Planning and Economic Development Manager
Town of Hillsborough
101 E. Orange St.
Hillsborough, NC 27278
RE: Annexation and/or Utility Extension for Orange County PIN: 9883194355
Good evening Shannan—
On behalf of Hubrich Contracting, I am formally requesting the Town of Hillsborough consider
the following two development options for the property identified by Orange County PIN
9883194355:
· Annexation of the subject property into the Town of Hillsborough and extension of
water and sewer utilities
· Extension of water and sewer utilities without annexation
Our client has an interest to develop the property into a mixed-use site consisting of the
following:
· K-8 charter school
· Charter high school
· Community recreational soccer and baseball fields with a pedestrian trail and
community park
· A tennis facility with indoor and outdoor courts
I ask that this topic be placed on the January agenda for consideration.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Regards,
Patrick Cummings, PE
Vice President
Summit Design and Engineering Services
Lawre nce Ro ad Parce l
Ja nua ry 18, 20 22
0 0.8 1.60.4 mi
0 1 20.5 km
1:48,0 00
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 1 of 2
Agenda Abstract
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Meeting date: Jan. 24, 2022
Department: Administrative
Services
Public hearing: No
Date of public hearing: N/A
PRESENTER/INFORMATION CONTACT
Administrative Services Director Jen Della Valle
Human Resources Manager Haley Bizzell
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED
Subject: One Orange Countywide Racial Equity Framework
Attachments:
1. One Orange Countywide Racial Equity Framework
2. Presentation slides
Brief summary:
Over the past year, the town has been working with Orange County and the towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro to
develop a countywide racial equity framework that aligns with principles from the Government Alliance on Race
and Equity (GARE). The framework for the board to consider adopting is attached.
Action requested:
Discuss and consider adoption of the racial equity framework.
ISSUE OVERVIEW
Background information and issue summary:
In January 2021, the multi-jurisdictional task force, One Orange, established subcommittees to work on each
section of the framework. One Orange is comprised of staff from the towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and
Hillsborough and Orange County.
The five subcommittees have been led by at least one jurisdictional member and include staff from each
jurisdiction.
- Training
- Racial Equity Assessment Lens
- Community Engagement
- Racial Equity Index
- Evaluation and Accountability
Through the work of these subcommittees, a draft framework was developed. One Orange is committed to
fostering a community where race no longer predicts life outcomes. In June 2021, the town board received a draft
framework. Since then, the task force coordinated community outreach events to share the framework with the
community and receive feedback.
For clerk’s use
AGENDA ITEM:
5.D
Consent
agenda
Regular
agenda
Closed
session
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 2 of 2
The One Orange Task Force is now presenting the revised framework to each jurisdiction’s governing board
requesting support for moving forward with this work. The task force believes the term “framework” better
describes the purpose of this work rather than “plan” since specific strategies are expected to come mostly from
individual jurisdictions, although there may be joint initiatives.
Financial impacts:
No financial impacts identified at this time.
Staff recommendation and comments:
Approve racial equity framework for moving forward the multi-jurisdictional collaborative work on racial equity.
One Orange Countywide Racial Equity Framework
Catalyst For Moving Forward
Introduction and Overview
Throughout the country, more and more communities are committing to advancing racial equity. Many
are pursuing foundation first and following the National Practice - normalize, organize and operationalize
the work. Orange County jurisdictions are also committed to this work and that commitment is one of the
main reasons why we are members of the Government Alliance on Race & Equity (GARE). GARE is a
national network of government agencies working to advance racial equity. Over the past decade, a
growing field of practice has emerged based on lessons learned from practitioners, as well as academic
experts, studying data and listening to the community so that residents have better outcomes. GARE brings
together governments throughout the country to provide racial equity training, racial equity tools, sharing
best practices, peer-to-peer learning, and academic resources to help strengthen work across jurisdictions.
As a county and within our individual jurisdictions, we continue to benefit from our involvement.
Many people ask, “What is racial equity and why consider race”?
WHAT IS "RACIAL EQUITY"?
GARE defines racial equity as "when race can no longer be used to predict life outcomes and outcomes for
all groups are improved."
The difference between racial equity and equality is that equity is about fairness, while equality is
about sameness.
Equity cannot be achieved until everyone starts from a level playing field.
Across all indicators of success, racial inequities continue to be a factor (e.g., education, housing,
criminal justice, jobs, public infrastructure, and health).
Over the history of our country, government has created and maintained a hierarchy based on race, of
who succeeds, fails, benefits, and burdened by the laws, policies, and practices. Inequities are sustained
by historic legacies, structures, and systems that support these patterns of exclusion. To achieve racial
equity, a fundamental transformation of government is necessary. In prior years, the government has
focused on addressing the symptoms of racial inequity by:
Funding programs and services that have proven to be mostly ineffective at addressing underlying
causes; and
Passing Civil Rights laws, which made racial discrimination illegal, but, after more than 50 years,
racial inequity continues to exist.
Government efforts, instead of focusing on symptoms of racial inequity, should focus on the policies and
institutional strategies that are driving the production of inequities.
WHY RACE?
Race is a social construct and not biological, as people often think. Defining racial categories has changed
over the years. Issues involving race are often "the elephant in the room" but rarely discussed with a shared
understanding. To advance racial equity, it is necessary we talk about race.
In the United States, while race, income, and wealth are closely connected, racial inequity is not just about
income. Even when income is the controlling factor, there still exist many inequities across multiple
indicators of success, including education, jobs, housing, health and incarceration. It is important to talk
about race to advance racial equity. To advance racial equity, we must normalize the conversation about
race and operationalize strategizes for advancing racial equity. In advancing racial equity, we will also be
building systems that allow us to address income and wealth inequity and recognize the bias that exists
based on gender, sexual orientation, ability, age, and religion. Focusing on race allows us to develop a
framework, tools, and resources that apply to other areas of marginalization, recognizing that different
strategies will be necessary to achieve equity in other areas.
RESULTS - ADVANCING RACIAL EQUITY IMPROVES OUR COLLECTIVE SUCCESS
Focusing on racial equity is critical in helping us achieve different outcomes for our communities. The goal
is not just to eliminate the inequities between whites and people of color, but to increase and enhance the
success of all groups. To eliminate disparities, we must strategize based on the experiences of communities
being underserved by existing institutions, systems, and structures. To understand the experience of those
communities, they must be included and engaged. In this process, we move past looking at disparities and
find racialized systems that are costly, suppress outcomes, and life chances for all groups. Systems that are
failing communities of color are failing us all by suppressing life chances and outcomes.
The One Orange Countywide Racial Equity Framework: Catalyst for Moving Forward is designed with the
commitment of uncovering and addressing implicit biases in our jurisdictions to ensure that race no longer
can be used to predict life outcomes in the Orange County community. Since August 2020, a multi-
jurisdictional workgroup collaborated on this framework using GARE methodology and listening to the
community. The workgroup presented a recommendation to develop a countywide framework to elected
officials of the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough and Orange County between October 2020
and January 2021.
Upon receiving support from the elected officials, the multi-jurisdictional workgroup formed sub-
committees and began working on this framework for change. Sub-committees began researching,
collaborating, compiling findings and drafting sections of the framework in April 2021. The first draft of the
framework was shared with elected officials and other stakeholders in June 2021.
This working document embodies racial equity as the strategy for change. The change materializes using
five pillars – 1) Training, 2) Community Engagement, 3) Racial Equity Index, 4) Racial Equity Assessment
Lens and 5) Evaluation/Accountability. Each jurisdiction will use this framework as guidance to take action
on a county and jurisdictional level.
One Orange Community Engagement in Action
The initial framework draft was presented in June 2021, and community engagement remains a
touchstone of the framework. The multi-jurisdictional workgroup offered three general presentation
sessions, followed by targeted outreach presentations to various communities and demographic groups
and collected questionnaire feedback.
The general sessions, held online, were designed to inform, involve, and consult with the community by
sharing the purpose and status of the draft plan and by asking a series of questions to gauge if the plan
met the community’s interests and needs in advancing racial equity. See questions and response
summaries below. During targeted outreach, the length of the presentations adjusted due to time
constraints. Information about the racial equity plan was provided along with the questionnaire.
In total, there were 660 responses, some participants selected more than three results regarding racial
equity that they would like to see. Overwhelmingly we encountered equity friendly community
members and many of those have lived experiences as a person of color. Many of the comments denoted
a lack of trust that progress towards racial equity will be achieved. Through further development and full
implementation of each of the pillars listed below, we intend to restore that trust.
Question 1: What is one hope and one fear about this Countywide Racial Equity Framework?
Hopes – Community, change, people being treated fairly, unity, and peace.
Fears – Lack of action, initiative will fail, increased racial tension, and violence.
Question 2: What three results regarding racial equity would you like to see?
There were 11 major themes noted. The top four results were:
1. Improved Education Outcomes for Children of Color
2. Increased Affordable Housing Options
3. Increased Employment Opportunities for People of Color
4. Improved Health Outcomes for People of Color
See additional details and tables in Appendix A.
Racial Equity Pillars
A sub-committee was developed for each pillar - Training, Community Engagement, Racial Index, Racial Equity
Assessment Lens, and Evaluation and Accountability. Each subcommittee included staff from Carrboro, Chapel
Hill, Hillsborough and Orange County.
Pillar 1 – Training and Organizational Capacity
Organizational capacity is a key component in advancing racial equity efforts. This includes a plan to
provide training to build capacity and advance racial equity in countywide systems. It is important to
provide adequate racial equity training to ensure that employees, Elected Officials, advisory boards and
commissions, community partners and other stakeholders build a foundation including definitions of key
terminology and commonality. It is also important to evaluate policies, services and new initiatives
incorporating an equity lens and encompassing racial equity in everyday operations and decision-making
processes.
GARE racial equity training topics include:
History of race
Implicit and explicit bias
Institutional and structural racism
How to use and apply racial equity tools
Understanding the role of government in advancing racial equity
Be motivated to take action
Targeted training groups:
Elected officials
Management/supervisors
Non-management
Advisory board and commission members
Community/business partners
General public
To ensure that an organization is ready to train the various groups, each organization should look at the
organization’s readiness to make a change. Leadership needs to be supportive of efforts and establish a
clear vision. An organization must also have appropriate resources such as staff time and budget.
Training can be provided as a requirement for all staff or as a voluntary opportunity.
While the specific training implementation will be determined by each jurisdiction, a benefit of this
countywide effort is the opportunity to leverage one another and collaborate on training, when
possible.
Appendix B has more detailed information developed as a set of best practice guidelines to review and
consider prior to implementing racial equity training.
Pillar 2 – Community Engagement
Community Engagement, a vital strategy in centering and advancing racial equity in the community,
requires the expertise and people of lived experiences. To effectively remove race as a predictor of
success, residents and employees of color should also be engaged as subject matter experts on
institutional barriers and the strategies to dismantle those barriers. This engagement will make for better
procedures, policies, and programs.
This sub-committee established the following shared principles for shifting the power dynamics in
government to prioritize the perspective of communities most impacted by racism.
ONE ORANGE RACIAL EQUITY C OMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PRINCIPLES
Each jurisdiction has community engagement methods and strategies, and the strategy laid out in
Appendix C can be used to strengthen and supplement those efforts. The Spectrum of Public
Participation below is a tool of the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2). The
international professional organization works to advance the practice of public participation globally, and
the spectrum is considered a best practice. Additional tools adapted from various sources are provided to
help operationalize community engagement.
Use the 3-Step Community Engagement Process to select the best engagement approach. This process
can assist jurisdictions in creating an engagement process that centers equity and honors the wealth of
knowledge in each jurisdiction. Community engagement provides an opportunity to repair or replicate
harm and to build relationships and community. For all community members, each interaction and each
engagement contribute to the experience of their relationship with the government. Our focus on racial
equity acknowledges that interactions and lack of engagement have historically led to disparate
outcomes for communities of color. Community engagement fulfills the social justice maxim, “Nothing
About Us, Without Us,” and increases the likelihood of community buy-in during implementation.
GARE also suggests providing a form of reimbursement for their time and expertise ― not as an incentive
but as compensation. Jurisdictions are encouraged to explore community engagement compensations
strategies, begin piloting the 3-Step Community Engagement Process and provide feedback as we
continue to refine the One Orange Community Engagement Strategy.
The One Orange Racial Equity Framework requires a pragmatic approach informed by the analysis racially
disaggregated data from the Racial Equity Index covered in the next section of this report, coupled with
the information learned through community engagement.
Pillar 3 – Racial Equity Index
The overall goal of this pillar is to develop an index depicting the correlations of key indicators to predict
outcomes and impacts on racial disparity in identified areas such as income, education and health in the
county and jurisdictions. The use of data and analytics is integral to the work of GARE to present a
descriptive picture of where the county and municipalities are currently in racial equity work, and to
track progress overtime.
The first work deliverable will be developing an overview of available relevant data and organizing it into
a user-friendly public-facing web page. Some of this work is anticipated to build on current
intergovernmental work being completed through Carolina Demography.
The second deliverable will be an analysis of the county workforce data utilizing the SAS modeling. After
this pilot, a decision will be made about the platform to use for future index work.
Commit to change toward a
new power dynamic for
shared decision-making,
working together with the
community.
Commit to listen, learn, and
implement solutions from
all communities, especially
impacted communities of
color
Commit to co-design
desired results and
engagement processes
(IAP2 Spectrum of Public
Participation) with the
community.
Commit to provide training
and technical assistance for
employees seeking to
engage and build
partnerships with the
community.
Pillar 4 – Racial Equity Assessment Lens
Evaluation of existing and new policies, practices, services and initiatives is another component of
advancing racial equity efforts. The Racial Equity Assessment Lens is designed with a user-friendly
approach incorporating a racial equity emphasis. The findings can effectuate change that results in
better community outcomes. To maintain the effectiveness of this approach, periodic review of this
assessment lens should occur based on real life experiences. See Appendix D for FAQ’s and assessment
lens.
Pillar 5 – Evaluation and Accountability
The Evaluation and Accountability Sub-committee is working on an evaluation process based on the
Results-Based Accountability principles (RBA) framework. The RBA framework provides a disciplined, data-
driven decision-making process to help local governments take action to solve problems. RBA is embedded
in the Racial Equity Assessment Lens that "starts with the desired result and works backward to the means,
to ensure the desired results that your plan works toward community results with stakeholder-driven
implementation." Results-based accountability helps distinguish between population level (whole group),
and performance measure (activity-specific) indicators that organizations use to determine whether they
are having an actual impact. The RBA framework indicates the relationship over time between results,
indicators, and activities. It is based on seven questions of population accountability: What are the desired
results? What would the results look like? What are the community indicators that would measure the
desired results? What does the data tell us? Who are your partners? What works to change the data
trend toward racial equity? What actions should you start with?
Performance Accountability for Actions: The Road to Getting to Results
In using the RBA framework, the groundwork has already been set. For each community indicator, the
group has identified a set of actions. Facilitated action planning sessions help to refine the steps.
Population-level indicators and results will then help to build a performance plan. Performance measures
will ensure actions or activities are crafted in a way to decrease racial disparities. More details are outlined
in Appendix E.
Some questions asked in this process are:
1. Who do you serve?
2. What is an action's intended impact?
3. What is the quality of the action?
4. What is the story behind the data?
5. Who are the partners with a role to play?
6. What works to have a greater impact?
7. What are the next steps?
Community outreach is a necessity in evaluation and accountability. A performance measure is a
quantifiable measure of how well an action is working and an action are the specific things that a
jurisdiction will do to achieve the outcomes. Some questions to consider includes: Are there outcomes
and actions that are receiving less attention than others? Is there a need to change the plan? Have plan
actions been implemented or are in progress? What do the results indicate as to how to improve? Is
there an explanation and/or proposal for resolving the issue if there are unmet or blocked actions Are
there racially diverse staff working on the plan over the year(s)? Are residents of color engaged in the
implementation of the plan over the year(s)? Are measures being recorded and updated as actions
change, or are they completed? Is the jurisdiction reporting on challenges and successes?
The One Orange Racial Equity Framework is designed so that evaluation and accountability of racial
equity work is aided by the Racial Equity Assessment Lens which is rooted in Results Based
Accountability. Evaluation of actions and outcomes is a continual process that relies on community
outreach, transparency, and effective data analysis.
Implementation
The multi-jurisdictional task force will continue to work collaboratively on education, projects, community
engagement and communication. Racial equity work should be guided by the Racial Equity Goals and
decisions of Elected officials in each jurisdiction. Each jurisdiction will use the five pillars as the
foundation to take action on a jurisdictional level.
Acknowledgements
Jurisdictional CORE Team Members:
Carrboro
Anita Jones-McNair, Lakisha White-Kelly, Allie Hansen, Chris Clark, Catherine Lazorko, Jon Hartman-
Brown, Cary McNallan, James Walker, Zequel Hall, Greg Sherman, Julie Eckenrode, Laura Janway
Mary Bryant, Trish McGuire and Will Potter
Chapel Hill
Shenekia Weeks, Rae Buckley, Celisa Lehew, Lisa Edwards, Tom Clark, and Shannon Bailey
Hillsborough
Haley Bizzell, Jen Della Valle, Stephanie Trueblood, Eli Valsing, and Catherine Wright
Orange County
Erica P. Bryant, Nancy Coston, Sharron Hinton, Brenda Bartholomew, Quintana Stewart,
Renee Price, Robert Williams, Sarah Pickhardt, Melvyn Blackwell, Desmond Frierson, Jennifer Galassi,
Diogenes DeLosSantos, Juliet Sheridan, Tara May, and Vicki Jones
Appendices
APPENDIX A. - One Orange Community Engagement in Action Results
General Organizational Invite Targeted Outreach Presentation
Marian Cheek Jackson Center Refugee Support Center
El Centro Hispano members Northern Orange Branch of the NAACP members
Cedar Grove Community Center Public housing residents
Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association
(RENA) Orange County Changemakers
Juvenile Justice Crime Control Commission Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness
Third Sector Alliance Chapel Hill-Carrboro of the NAACP members
Orange County Community Remembrance
Coalition Long -Term Recovery Groups/contacts
Refugee Community Partnership members Inter-Faith Council residents
Orange Congregations In Missions Local Reentry Council
United Voices of Efland Cheeks Intergovernmental Park Work Group
Orange County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council Orange County Toy Chest
A Helping Hand Orange County Senior Center
Art Therapy Institute Chapel Hill - Carrboro Public Housing
Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Triangle, Inc Joint Board of Health
Boys and Girls Club of Durham and Orange
County Chapel Hill – Carrboro School Board
Transplanting Traditions Community Farm, Inc. Carrboro Racial Equity Commission
Farmer Food Share Chapel Hill Public Housing Resident Council
meeting
Piedmont Health Services Orange County School Board
Boomerang Youth, Inc. Orange County Commissioners
Table NC Orange County Board of Health meeting
Club Nova Community, Inc.
The Arc of the Triangle
Chapel Hill Meals on Wheels
Hope Renovations
Pathway to Change
Community Members
Specifically, the following community input was gathered. Using the interactive tool Mentimeter, during
the general sessions, the visual representation below captures attendees responses displaying the most
frequent words more prominently.
Question 1: What is one hope and one fear about this County Wide Racial Equity Framework?
Again, Mentimeter was used to display the attendees responses to the question below. The image below
displays one frame containing nine responses to the second question raised. Reponses were organized
into themes and served as the bases for the paper and electronic surveys used in targeted presentations.
The community prioritized the following racial equity results. In total, there were 660 responses. It is
important to note that the majority of the responses below were gathered from the Orange County Toy
Chest target community engagement.
285 Improved Education Outcomes for Children of Color
285 Increased Affordable Housing Options
119 Increased Decision-Making Opportunities for People of Color
108 Increased Influence on Budget/Resource Allocations
162 Increased Employment Opportunities for People of Color
157 Improved Health Outcomes for People of Color
82 Increased Community Engagement for People of Color
82 Increased Local Government Accountability to Communities of Color
140 Increased Opportunities for Youth Voice(s)
146 Decreased Criminal Justice Involvement for People of Color
138 Increased Community Unity
The multi-jurisdictional workgroup learned it is easier to connect with community bodies formed with
decision-making authority, specific planning responsibilities, or service providers. By leveraging Orange
County’s Toy Chest, we were able to reach voices that would otherwise go unheard. Conversely,
engaging people of color in the community with different lived experiences of institutional racism
through general invitation can be challenging for many reasons. However, many of the families opted to
take the survey, going beyond checking a box to thoughtfully crafting sentences to voice their desire for
racial equity. As we move forward to effectuate this plan, each jurisdiction is encouraged to use the
communities' input as they apply a racial equity lens to their policies, practices, and initiatives
APPENDIX B. TRAINING/ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY FRAMEWORK
Purpose: The training committee will develop a plan to provide training to policymakers,
managers, staff, boards and commission members, community partners, and the general
public to build capacity to advance racial equity and to embed racial equity into countywide
systems.
1. Each organization should identify the following prior to providing racial equity training:
a. Organization’s racial equity vision – this will allow the organization to
determine how the training can align with and make progress toward the
overall equity vision.
b. Purpose of the training
c. Training goals
d. Assessment of what has already been done, such as policy revisions and
previous trainings including the content, focus, and perspectives of previous
trainings.
e. Next steps after training and who is responsible for moving those efforts forward.
2. Questions to ask prior to training:
a. What is the staff’s capacity to take on this training and time commitment?
b. Does the organizational culture support candid conversations around race and equity?
See Organizational Capacity section below.
c. Is leadership invested in transformative change?
d. What do employees expect and/or want to get out of the training? Training can then
be tailored to those interests.
e. What are timely next steps for participants?
3. Structure of training: Below are guidelines and/or suggestions and considerations for the
structure of racial equity training.
a. Adapt presentation style for each member group ensuring diversity of participants
within each training session.
Elected officials
Management/supervisors
Non-management
Advisory board members
Community/business partners
General public
b. Multiple training facilitators across jurisdictions & a technical support person
Have diverse facilitators to keep trainees engaged including at least one
facilitator that is representative of the majority of the group regarding
gender and race.
Consider having a technical support person to help facilitate.
c. Offer initial training to start the conversation around racial equity and provide
background information.
Balance lecture with discussion, breakout sessions, and group
discussions.
GARE training should be completed consecutively.
Training length, including the number of days and hours, will likely vary
for each organization depending on the culture, goals, purpose of the
training, and the number of people in attendance.
Suggested preparation
Practice presenting the training beforehand.
Review GARE’s FAQs to prepare for answering staff questions.
Share resources including training content and FAQs with facilitators
across organizations.
4. Training Content:
a. Initial background/information session on racial equity. This introductory training would
be geared toward new employees or people who have not attended racial equity
training. The initial training helps build a shared language and understanding of basic
concepts. When presenting the training content, consider varied literacy and learning
styles across participants.
b. On-going/follow-up training
Implicit and explicit bias
Institutional and structural racism
Racial equity tool – what it is and how to use it for your organization.
Inclusive outreach and public engagement
Operationalizing and organizing racial equity
c. After the training, ask for feedback or an evaluation to help improve future training
content.
5. Organizational Capacity:
a. Organization’s culture
Is the organization ready to make changes to advance racial equity?
b. Develop, engage and maintain a core team of employees from multiple levels of
influence across departments.
c. Time commitment
Facilitators and participants
Initial training from GARE and learning COHORT process.
Train the trainer approach.
Management & supervisors time to attend trainings and complete assignments
outside of training.
d. Resources
Budget
Community partners
Employee commitment
Full-time diversity, equity, and inclusion position
e. Cross-organizational teams
Facilitation
APPENDIX C. Suggested Community Engagement Strategy
Spectrum of Public Participation
Inform Consult
Involve Collaborate Empower
Public
Partici-
pation
Goal
To provide the public with
balanced and objective
information to assist them
in understanding the
problem, alternatives
and/or solutions.
To obtain public
feedback on
analysis,
alternatives and/or
decision.
To work directly
with the public
throughout the
process to ensure
that public concerns
and aspirations are
consistently
understood and
considered.
To partner with the
public in each aspect
of the decision,
including the
development of
alternatives and
identification of the
preferred solution.
To place final
decision-
making in the
hands of the
public.
Promise
to the
Public
We will keep you informed. We will keep you
informed, listen and
acknowledge
concerns and
aspirations, and
provide feedback on
how public input
influenced the
decision.
We will work with
you to ensure that
your concerns and
aspirations are
directly reflected in
the alternatives
developed, and we
will provide
feedback on how
public input
influenced the
decision.
We will look to you
for advice and
innovation in
formulating solutions
and incorporate your
advice and
recommendations
into the decision to
the maximum extent
possible.
We will
implement
what you
decide.
Increasing impact on decision-making
Levels of Participation Defined
Organizing Engagement provides a detailed description of each level of participation and its
benefits and limitations.
LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION BENEFITS LIMITATIONS
Inform: In an informing process,
participants are largely passive
recipients of information, although
they may use the information they
receive later to vote or choose to
participate in additional
engagement efforts.
At its most effective and beneficial form,
the information shared with the public is
as objective, accurate, and fact-based as
possible and an informing process keeps
the public apprised of the rationales
motivating the decisions being made by
leaders.
In its most potentially harmful manifestation, an informing
process can be used as a manipulative tactic to mollify
legitimate public concerns or deceive the public into
supporting a decision or policy that is not in their interest.
*Use the Racial Equity Assessment Lens to investigate
benefits and burdens of your project on the community.
Consult: In a consulting process,
participants contribute their
viewpoints, opinions or preferences,
and leaders then use this
information to inform decisions.
At its most effective and beneficial form, a
consulting process improves the
outcomes of a decision-making process by
giving public officials a more accurate
understanding of the beliefs, needs,
concerns, or priorities of those their
decisions will impact.
At its most harmful form, a disorganized consulting
process can take a large amount of the public’s time or
resources but produce few tangible results, or it can be
manipulatively designed to make the public feel it has
been heard when leaders are ignoring the public’s
recommendations.
*Provide compensation when possible.
Involve: In an involving process,
participants are actively involved in
a decision-making process organized
by leaders.
At its most effective and beneficial form,
an involving process includes members of
the public in meaningful roles, with the
public included from the beginning stages
of the process through its conclusion.
At its most harmful form, an involving process can be
intentionally and selectively exclusionary to empower
some members, groups, or viewpoints over others, or it
can be so mismanaged, disingenuous, or even fraudulent
that the public begins to distrust those in leadership
positions, lose faith in their public institutions, or question
whether any participatory process can be genuine.
*Racial equity requires that we are race explicit, not
exclusive. Center the voice of people of color and lived
experiences.
Collaborate: In a collaborative
process, leaders work in partnership
with members of the public to
identify problems and develop
solutions.
At its most effective and beneficial form,
genuine collaborative processes and
partnerships give leaders and participants
equal status, with those who hold the
power sharing some degree of control,
management, or decision-making
authority with participants.
At its most harmful form, leaders use their position,
authority, influence, or power to exploit or disempower
their partners or ask them to do all the work on a project
while the leaders derive most of the benefits, funding, or
accolades.
*Provide compensation when possible.
Empower: In an empowering
process, leaders may partially or
entirely turn over control,
management, or decision-making
authority to public participants, or
the public may mobilize to develop a
decision-making process instead of
institutional leadership or action on
an important issue.
At its most effective and beneficial form,
an empowering process entrusts the
public with decision-making authority
and, thereby, builds greater trust among
the public. It also provides the necessary
resources to members of the public who
may be disadvantaged or unable to
participate without accommodations or
assistance.
In a problematic or harmful form, organizations or
individuals are entrusted to manage a process they may
not have the capacity or resources to manage
competently, or institutional leaders, professionals, and
experts remove themselves from the process that requires
institutional leadership, specialized expertise, or
professional skills to achieve a successful conclusion or
resolution.
*You may have to provide capacity building or technical
assistance.
Adapted from Organizing Engagement
*Indicates ways to center equity principles to avoid causing harm to historically marginalized populations.
Determining the Best Approach (3-Step Community Engagement Process)
To determine the best approach to engage the community, use this three-step process that asks a series
of clarifying questions which, when answered thoughtfully, lead to several engagement methods. The
steps include:
1. Community Engagement Design Tool ― a question-based tool to clarify your engagement’s
context, scope, people needed, and purpose.
2. Community Engagement Matrix Tool ― a grid-based tool used to detail and tailor your
engagement needs with potential engagement methods located in the International Association
for Public Participation (IAP2) Matrix.
3. IAP2 Methods Matrix ― a curated list of engagement methods aligned and organized by level of
participation on the spectrum, engagement context, engagement purpose, and scale used to
generate engagement methods that match your needs.
STEP 1: COMMUNITY E NGAGEMENT DESIGN TOOL
The Policy Project’s Community Engagement Design Tool was adapted below to help determine the best
approach to engagement on the IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation by considering the key factors on
your policy or project ― namely, the context, scope, people and purpose.
Context: for policy-making supported by engagement.
What’s the broader context that shapes the environment, likely
reaction or readiness of the community to consider the problem or
opportunity under consideration?
Scope: of the problem or opportunity.
What’s the scope of the problem, opportunity, or outcome? Are there
any limits on the potential solution?
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower
Engagement level is more likely to be on the left side of the spectrum
if there are few complex, significant or controversial factors in the
context. Engagement moves further right the more complex,
controversial, or challenging the factors are.
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower
Engagement level is positioned further left on the spectrum the
smaller the policy problem-solving scope is. Engagement moves
further right the broader the scope is.
People: individuals and groups affected.
Who are the people, stakeholders, and organizations who will be
affected? What’s the nature of our relationship and connection to
these people?
Purpose: of engagement.
What’s the purpose of community engagement?
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower
Engagement level moves toward the right on the spectrum the more
significant the policy question is to the public, stakeholders, and
community organizations.
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower
Engagement level moves toward right of the spectrum to receive
permission or endorsement or to create solutions. Engagement moves
toward center to critique or develop proposals. Engagement moves
toward left to provide feedback on a policy proposal.
Design Factors
Provide brief statement of rationale describing each of the design
factors.
Spectrum of Public Participation Levels
Check all that apply.
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower
Context
Scope
People
Purpose
Public Participation Levels to Be Used
Based on your assessment of the design factors, decide the best public participation level to meet your program’s needs. The following public
participation levels will be used:
STEP 2: COMMUNITY E NGAGEMENT MATRIX TOOL
Once use of the Community Engagement Design Tool is complete, the public participation level best
suited for your project will emerge. The next step is to consider additional sub-categories that help tailor
a community engagement strategy that best fits your community’s needs by using the Community
Engagement Matrix Tool adapted from The Policy Project’s Selecting Methods of Community
Engagement Resource Guide.
1. Indicate the level of public participation on the spectrum. Check all that apply.
2. Indicate the engagement context. Check all that apply.
3. Indicate the engagement purpose. Check all that apply.
4. Indicate the anticipated engagement scale. Check the one that best applies.
Spectrum Engagement
Context Engagement Purpose Scale Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower Low Trust High Complexity Tight Timeframes Need New Solutions Hard to reach audiences Highly political High emotion or outrage Need to understand community better Share information Legal Compliance Understand reactions, implications, and consequences Generate alternatives Improve quality of policy, strategy, plans Relationship development Community capacity building Generate support Behavior Change Social License (community acceptance) Community adaptive (impact causes major life changes) Identify or address problems Make decisions Innovations Individual Small group Large group Public Engagement Project
STEP 3: SELECTING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY (IAP2 METHODS MATRIX)
After completing use of the Community Engagement Matrix Tool, by indicating which elements are most
relevant to your community engagement project, use the IAP2 Methods Matrix found on pages 6-10 in
The Policy Project’s Selecting Methods of Community Engagement Resource Guide to identify possible
methods.
The matrix contains 67 innovative methods for engagement. It is arranged by name of the method,
followed by a brief description, then by the appropriate Spectrum of Public Participation levels, the
engagement context criteria, the engagement purpose criteria, and finally the engagement’s scale. Select
the method or a combination of methods that meets your capacity, needs, and resources.
Portion of IAP2 Methods Matrix to illustrate design Source: Selecting Methods of Community Engagement
Using the three-step process described above can aid jurisdictions in creating an engagement process
that centers equity and honors the wealth of knowledge in each jurisdiction. Community engagement
provides an opportunity to repair or replicate harm, to build relationships and community. For all
community members, each interaction and each engagement contribute to the experience of their
relationship with the government. Our focus on racial equity acknowledges that historically interactions
and lack of engagement have led to disparate outcomes for communities of color. Community
engagement fulfills the social justice maxim, “Nothing About Us, Without Us,” and increases the
likelihood of community buy-in during implementation.
Next Steps
The committee learned it is easier to connect with community bodies formed with decision-making
authority, specific planning responsibilities, or service providers. Conversely, engaging people of color in
the community with different lived experiences of institutional racism can be challenging for many
reasons. GARE suggests providing a form of reimbursement for their time and expertise ― not as an
incentive but as compensation.
The One Orange Racial Equity Framework requires a pragmatic approach that relies heavily on analyzing
racially disaggregated data detailed in the Racial Equity Index covered in the next section of this report.
Throughout every step of the process, the committee will use the 3-Step Community Engagement
Process to select the best engagement approach. Jurisdictions are encouraged to explore community
engagement compensations strategies, begin piloting the 3-Step Community Engagement Process and
provide feedback as we continue to refine the One Orange Community Engagement Strategy.
APPENDIX D. RACIAL EQUITY ASSESSMENT LENS
One Orange – Let's Get REAL on Racial Equity
RACIAL EQUITY ASSESSMENT (REAL)
Goal: When we achieve racial equity, race will no longer predict opportunities, outcomes, or the
distribution of resources for residents of Orange County, North Carolina, particularly for communities of
color. Therefore, it is important to evaluate initiatives and demonstrate how it aligns with the County’s
and/or Town’s racial equity goals.
FAQ’s:
What is the purpose of conducting this assessment? Conduct this assessment to measure how
communities of color are affected by short and long term governmental decisions. It should be used by
decision makers to evaluate new and existing initiatives. The word “initiative” is broadly used to cover
policies, practices, processes, procedures, services, projects and the like.
Who should use this assessment? Elected officials, boards, commissions, staff, community partners, and
stakeholders to answer and evaluate “who, what, where, why and how” through a racial equity
assessment lens.
When should the assessment be conducted? Each jurisdiction will determine when the assessment
should be conducted. Once that decision is made, orientation on the assessment shall be provided to all
relevant staff and/or stakeholders.
How do I conduct the assessment? The assessment is a worksheet that prompts users to consider the
intention of the initiative and how it impacts communities of color. The assessment should generate
discussion and analysis that helps government align its initiatives with the racial equity goal stated above.
There is not a “correct” answer to the questions. The completion of the assessment has value based on
its merit.
How can I get a copy of the lens? The Racial Equity Assessment Lens is included on pages ____.
Racial Equity Assessment Lens (REAL) Lens
NAME OF INITIATIVE New or Existing? Who is Conducting the
Assessment?
ORIGIN AND DESCRIPTION
For New initiatives – Why this initiative and why now?
For existing initiatives- include background information and milestone dates
DESIRED RESULTS
What specific results/outcomes are intended for the community or organization? (How will this
initiative achieve this goal? Is anything being created, removed, incentivized, mandated, allowed or
assigned by this initiative?)
What policies are relevant to this initiative? How do racial and social inequities impact these areas?
Consider topics and subtopics related to what you are trying to achieve, ie: business and economic
development, labor and workforce development and retention, the judiciary, public safety, housing,
education, health, transportation, environment, human services, youth, recreation and COVID-19.
Topic/Issue Baseline Data and Racial Disparities Historical Root Causes of Disparities
For example, rather
than write
“education” below,
list “attendance,
school discipline, and
commutes.”
What does available data or research
say about this issue? What disparities
already exist within this issue?
What caused the numbers to look
like they do today? Were the causes
in the distant past and/or more
recent? Were they purposeful or
unintentional?
What is the specific desired result statement - _______________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
DEMOGRAPHICS (be as specific as possible)
Who is this initiative focused on? (Neighborhoods, geographic areas, racial groups, income
groups, etc.)
What data can you provide to describe the target population?
What data is missing?
Consider groups based on race, earnings, education, geography, occupation, age, gender identity,
sexual identity, religion, immigration status, etc. Consider atypical groupings.
BENEFITTING INDIVIDUALS OR
GROUPS
BURDENED INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS
Funded initiatives
If the new initiative is
funded
Existing initiative is
funded
Non funded initiatives
If the new initiative is
not funded
If the existing
initiative is no longer
funded
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
List the individuals or groups who will potentially benefit the most or be burdened the most by this
Initiative.
• How have you involved community members in developing this initiative?
• Have you involved those directly impacted?
• How have you addressed the concerns raised by community members? Especially those
directly impacted.
• Going forward, how do you plan to include voices of those most impacted / burdened? How?
Please note if they are: (1) Already involved in the drafting of the process; (2) What is your first step
in involving them; or (3) Why you are not involving them in the process.
Individual or Group
Already Involved, First Step to Involve, or reason for No Involvement
Who else from the community should be involved in designing, governing, or executing the Initiative?
Please note if they are: (1) Already involved in the drafting of the process; (2) What is your first step
in involving them; or (3) Why you are not involving them in the process.
Individual or Group
Already Involved, First Step to Involve, or reason for No Involvement
BENEFITS
Which area(s) of the County/Town could be impacted by this Initiative?
Share any relevant data (link to jurisdictional map and/or information)
Consider differences such as towns, density between residential, commercial, rural and
suburban, access to resources, transit, geography, and proximity to health care services.
AREA HOW AREA WOULD BENEFIT HOW AREA WOULD BE BURDENED
If you mentioned communities of color in the table of above, how might this Initiative negatively impact
them?
If you mentioned people with low incomes in the table above, how might this Initiative negatively impact
them?
IMPACTS
Considering the Section above when filling out the table below on unintended consequences.
• What are the unintended consequences of this Initiative? Investigate if there have been other
Initiatives of this type. If yes, what is known about the effect of these Initiatives, especially of
different racial groups?
• What can be done to mitigate any negative impacts?
• Are there any challenges that need to overcome? How?
• Share any relevant data
Type Potential Unintended
Consequence
Mitigation Strategies To Prevent
Consequences And Advance
Racial Equity
SOCIAL
Consider native and long term
residents, rural residents,
transit, trust in government,
education, etc.
ECONOMIC
Consider wages, competition,
tourism, unemployment, small
businesses, etc.
HEALTH
Consider impacts on pollution,
health access, existing health
disparities, etc.
ENVIRONMENT
Consider impacts on pollution,
natural resources, transit, etc.
OTHER
Consider how a resident might
interact with this measure
“start to finish.” Think through
the best- and worst-case
scenarios
What challenges should be overcome? How?
Share any relevant data?
ACCOUNTABILITY
How will the impact of the initiative be measured?
What success indicators or progress benchmarks are incorporated in the proposed Initiative? (Provide
indicators/benchmarks/metrics)
What is missing? What will happen if these metrics are met and what will happen if they are not met?
In what way does this Initiative deeply consider the experience of the residents it will impact?
How will you share you results with your leadership and other funders?
How will you share results with community members and stakeholders?
How will you acquire feedback from community members and stakeholders and incorporate findings?
Recommendations –
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
Signature of Assessor(s)
_________________________ ________________________ __________________________
APPENDIX E. EVALUATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY
PURPOSE: The Evaluation and Accountability Committee will develop an Evaluation Plan based on
the principles of the Results-Based Accountability (“RBA”) framework. RBA is a national model and
provides a disciplined, data-driven, decision-making process to help local governments take action to
solve problems. The approach delineates between community conditions/ results and performance
accountability/outcomes. Our Evaluation Plan will help us apply racial equity principles embedded
into the Results-Based Accountability (RBA) methodology into the Orange County Racial Equity Action
Plan.
Results and Community Indicators that Create Outcomes
1. What needs or opportunities were identified during the research and assessment phase of this
process?
2. What needs to be different in our jurisdiction’s culture, workforce, policies, practices, and
procedures?
4. What change do we ideally want (not just for what we would settle)?
5. What does our jurisdiction define as the most important racially equitable outcomes? (Should be
answered by the Community)
6. What are some known racial inequities in your jurisdiction? What does population level data
reveal about root causes or factors influencing the racial inequity?
7. What are the root causes or factors creating these racial inequities?
8. How does your jurisdiction’s relationship with communities of color need to change?
9. How can those most adversely affected by an issue be actively involved in solving it?
10. How will proposed outcomes address root causes of racial disparities and advance institutional
and/or systemic change?
11. What government programs will this proposal impact? What are the opportunity areas? I.e.
budget, health, jobs, social services, criminal justice?
12. How do you ensure your proposal is working and sustainable over time?
Creating Actions to Achieve Outcomes
1. Were actionable solutions identified during the information gathering phase of this process by
communities of color?
2. Which actions were identified as priorities by the communities of color?
3. What is a specific change in policy, practice, or procedure that could help produce more equitable
outcomes? Are these changes working together, in a complementary way?
4. How will an action decrease racial disparities?
5. Are there any unintended consequences? Who benefits; who will be burdened? Can they be
mitigated?
6. Will the proposal impact specific geographic areas and what are the racial demographics of those
areas?
7. What capacity is needed to successfully implement the action? Is it adequately funded?
8. How will an action be implemented and by whom?
9. Is the action achievable within the lifetime of the plan?
10. Is the action measurable and how will it be measured?
11. What performance level data is available for the proposal? Are there gaps in the data that need to be
filled and/or tell us about the racial inequity in our community.
12. How will the racial equity plan be communicated, internally and externally? Is the communication
reaching the intended audience?
13. How can the plan be systematized?
Who is Responsible or Accountable for Completion of Each Action (Stewardship Plan)
1 . Ongoing coordination
a. What is needed?
b. Who is accountable?
c. How will they be held accountable?
d. Is the plan durable?
e. Does the plan allow for continuity and succession?
2. Ongoing, Racially Equitable and Relevant Engagement
3. Community Engagement
a. Stakeholder Engagement
b. Staff Engagement
c. Boards and Commissions
d. Elected Officials
4. Annual Progress Reporting prior to the Budget Process
a. Are there outcomes and actions that are receiving less attention than others?
b. Is there a need to change the plan? (Process Improvements annually)
c. Have plan actions been implemented or are in progress? What do the results indicate as to
how to improve?
d. If there are unmet or blocked actions, is there an explanation and/or proposal for resolving
the issue?
e. Are racially diverse staff working on the plan over the year(s)? How many?
f. Are residents of color engaged in the implementation of the plan over the year(s)? How
many?
g. Are measures being recorded and updated as actions change or are completed?
h. How many citizens are engaged?
i. Each jurisdiction reports on challenges and success annually to elected officials.
5.What are the resource gaps?
6.How will we prioritize the needs?
a. What is needed?
b. Who is accountable?
c. How will they be held accountable?
d. Is the plan durable?
e. Does the plan allow for continuity and succession?
One Orange Countywide Racial Equity Framework:
Catalyst For Moving Forward
One Orange is a commitment by Orange
County leaders and staff to uncover and
address implicit racial biases in our
institutions to ensure that race can no longer
be used to predict life outcomes in our
community.
One Orange Mission Statement
2
1. Introduction & Overview
2. Racial Equity Pillars Updates
•Training & Organizational Capacity
•Community Engagement
•Racial Equity Index
•Racial Equity Assessment Lens
•Evaluation and Accountability
3. Next Steps
4. Questions
Framework
3
•When race can no longer predict life
outcomes
•People of all races struggle, and when you
compare outcomes across most
indicators, black and brown people
struggle the most.
What is Racial Equity?
4
•Racial equity is about making sure our
policies and practices no longer cause
harm to black and brown communities.
•When we do this, we make things
better for everyone.
–Equity is about fairness
–Equality is about sameness
Why Equity?
5
Why Race?
6
Systems are
built that
better address
wealth
inequity and
recognize bias
for all people.
.
Normalizing
Organizing
Operationalizing
•Support state and local jurisdictions that
are advancing racial equity;
•Build internal capacity to uncover racism
and bias within their organization; and
•Help expand and strengthen local and
regional collaboration.
7
Government Alliance on Race and
Equity (“GARE”)
•Virtual
•Feedback
informed targeted
outreach survey
General
Sessions
•In-Person
•Virtual
•Toy Chest
Targeted
Outreach •Community
Generated Racial
Equity Priorities
Over 650
Responses
Community Engagement
8
What is one hope and one fear about this
Countywide Racial Equity Framework?
9
285 Improved Education Outcomes for Children of Color
285 Increased Affordable Housing Options
162 Increased Employment Opportunities for People of Color
157 Improved Health Outcomes for People of Color
146 Decreased Criminal Justice Involvement for People of Color
140 Increased Opportunities for Youth Voice(s)
138 Increased Community Unity
119 Increased Decision-Making Opportunities for People of Color
108 Increased Influence on Budget/Resource Allocations
82 Increased Community Engagement for People of Color
82 Increased Local Government Accountability to Communities of
Color
What three results regarding racial equity
would you like to see?
10
Racial
Equity
Training &
Organizational
Capacity
Community
Engagement
Racial Equity
Index
(Data)
Racial Equity
Assessment
Lens
Evaluation
and
Accountability
Racial Equity as the Catalyst for Change
11
•Developed a plan to provide training to key
stakeholders to advance racial equity and
embed racial equity into countywide systems.
Training & Organizational Capacity
12
Community Engagement
13
Commit to change toward a
new power dynamic for shared
decision-making, working
together with the community.
Commit to listen, learn, and
implement solutions from all
communities, especially
impacted communities of color
Commit to co-design desired
results and engagement
processes (IAP2 Spectrum of
Public Participation) with the
community.
Commit to provide training and
technical assistance for
employees seeking to engage
and build partnerships with the
community.
Principles
Step 1
CLARIFY
•Community
Engagement Design
Tool
Step 2
DETAIL & TAILOR
•Community
Engagement Matrix
Tool
Step 3
SELECT
STRATEGY STRATEGYSTRATEGY
•IAP2 Methods Matrix
Key Updates
14
•Community Engagement Framework
•International Association for Public
Participation (IAP2) Model
•3-Step Community Engagement Process
Racial Equity Index (Data Process)
15
Racial Equity
Index
Statisticalanalysis
of causal factors
Uncover &
document
disparities
•Contract and staff resources being
identified to compile racial equity
demographics
•Work continues with SAS to develop
prescriptive analytics and index
Key Updates
16
•Approach to evaluate existing and new
policies, practices, services and other
initiatives using a racial equity lens.
•Aligns racial equity outcomes to racial equity
goals.
Racial Equity Assessment Lens
17
•The Evaluation and Accountability Committee will
develop an Evaluation process based on the
principles of the Results-Based Accountability
(“RBA”) framework.
•RBA is a national model and provides a disciplined,
data-driven, decision-making process to help local
governments take action to solve problems.
•An Evaluation Plan will help local governments apply
racial equity principles embedded into the Results-
Based Accountability (RBA) methodology into Racial
Equity Action Plans.
Evaluation and Accountability
18
•Continued Collaboration
–Develop racialized history
–Create racial equity index and evaluation and
accountability steps
–Consider racial equity capacity building training
Next Steps
19
Questions?
20
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 1 of 6
Agenda Abstract
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Meeting date: Jan. 24, 2022
Department: Administration &
Police
Public hearing: No
Date of public hearing: N/A
PRESENTER/INFORMATION CONTACT
Town Manager Eric Peterson
Police Chief Duane Hampton
ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED
Subject: Police and Employee Market Pay Issues
Attachments:
1. Memo from Chief Hampton: Police Salaries and Staffing
2. Town of Hillsborough FY22 Classification and Pay Plan (current)
3. Updated FY22 Classification and Pay Plan (proposed) - moves sworn police to a separate plan and adjusts pay
ranges for all positions
Brief summary:
During the FY22 budget process (May-June 2021), competitiveness of salaries in the region was identified as a
concern, especially for police officers. Specific funds were included in the FY22 budget for market rate adjustments
for police, as well as the General Fund and Water/Sewer funds for all other employees.
Employee retention, recruitment, and salary compression issues have become a concern for many local
governments and private sector, in our region and nationally. These were the most frequently mentioned issues of
concern during a Triangle J Council of Governments (TJCOG) managers meeting last week about the FY23 budget.
As we all know, effects from “the Great Resignation,” major competition from the private sector, and so few
people applying for law enforcement positions is driving salaries significantly higher, making it difficult to 1) fill
positions, and 2) fill them with qualified people.
Due to these pressures, many local governments are trying to engage contractors to complete pay studies.
Unfortunately, due to the demand, it’s taking longer than usual to get studies completed. The town is in the queue
with TJCOG, but the result for each employee is not expected until August, thus meaning possible September
implementation. Seven months, assuming the deadline is met, is a long time to wait in these conditions when:
1) There is a lot of competition for town employees.
2) We’ve already been losing employees in recent years.
3) Many of our starting salary ranges are far below market (about $6,000 to $7,000). More details on this in the
“issue overview section” below.
4) Salary compression is making it harder to hire and creates internal equity issues with no easy fix.
5) Other local governments have addressed or are in the process of responding to these issues.
6) Losing employees with experience, critical knowledge, and key skills is the most damaging impact that can
occur to our organization, especially given the many unique skillsets that are required for many positions in
For clerk’s use
AGENDA ITEM:
5.E
Consent
agenda
Regular
agenda
Closed
session
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 2 of 6
the diverse operations provided by the town government. Losing even one or a few employees in key areas
can severely inhibit our ability to respond to emergencies, as well as provide daily services. We’ve already had
instances of this occurring. Unlike larger organizations that have a “deeper bench” of employees, we often
only have one or a handful that have key skillsets.
Ideally, waiting for a compensation and classification plan that addresses external market conditions, as well as
adjusting for internal equity factors, to make holistic changes at one time is preferred. Unfortunately, with almost
each new hire, patchwork decisions are being made to address compression-related inequities. While necessary,
there are often no good solutions as the adjustments can create other issues. Doing something now is important to
make these challenges more manageable, less frequent, and demonstrate to employees we are working to
address these issues.
Given the circumstances, waiting to make changes until August or September is not realistic. Bridge or stop-gap
measures need to be identified and implemented soon to address market related pressures, aid in recruitment of
new employees, and reduce the potential loss of talent until the study can be completed, approved by the town
board, and then implemented. The six actions requested below are the recommendations from the town manager,
human resources, and police chief on interim steps to address this matter. Additional information is included in the
“issue overview” section that further explains the rationale for the various increases and actions.
Action requested:
1. Authorize town manager to have a compensation and classification study conducted through TJCOG (Triangle J
Council of Governments). Note: Hillsborough is in the queue to have this done, data has been shared,
estimated completion is August/September, but contract is not yet signed.
2. Remove all sworn police positions from the Classification and Pay Plan and create a separate plan for this
group of employees. Note: this is a common practice since public safety related salaries frequently change
faster and to a greater extent than other local government positions. This complicates reasonable
benchmarking to other positions. This will be re-evaluated as part of the pay study.
3. Raise the starting salary grades for all sworn police positions by $4,086. This moves starting pay for a police
officer from $43,914 to $48,000.
4. $4,000 increase in annual salaries for all sworn positions effective February 14. Note this prevents salary
compression that exacerbates existing pay equity when new officers are hired. Reduces cost of FY23 pay plan
implementation.
5. Increase all employee (non-sworn police) pay grades by $2,000 (starting and maximum salaries per grade).
6. $2,000 increase in annual salaries for all employees (non-sworn) effective February 14.
ISSUE OVERVIEW
Background information and issue summary:
Compression Challenges
Almost every hire the town now makes creates compression challenges (i.e., hiring new employees near or above
existing employee salaries, above normal entry points, thus requiring “after-action salary adjustments”). This is a
problematic situation as it can create internal pay equity problems and risks losing qualified applicants. In the past
week our attempts to hire four new employees have each been complicated by this matter.
Experiences in Other Local Governments
Other area governments have also stated they’ve had to make more exceptions and after-action adjustments than
ever before. This is coming from units of local governments that already have the highest pay rates in the region,
do frequent pay studies, recently provided large across the board raises for employees (e.g., 7%), increased
maximum merit raise amounts (e.g., from 4% to 6%), provided cost of living adjustments when not normally done,
etc. The town manager had discussions with about a dozen managers across the state over the past two weeks on
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 3 of 6
this and other topics. They all echoed the same issues and points made during the recent TJCOG meeting. When it
comes to employee recruitment and retention, the term “arms race” keeps coming up as everyone is having to
increase salaries. Unexpected competition has come from fast food and big box retail stores that are now paying
$16+ per hour.
Police Salaries – Falling Behind the Region & Market
Chief Hampton’s attached memo does an excellent job providing details and describing the impact on the
Hillsborough Police Department (HPD). The starting salary for Hillsborough police officers is $43,914, but the new
baseline appears to be $50,000 – about a $6,000 gap to where we should be. Four Wake County agencies are now
over $50,000 for starting pay, with two more likely to join this level with pay studies being completed (Fuquay-
Varina and Holly Springs), and Chapel Hill appears they may increase to that amount as well within a few weeks.
The City of Burlington just approved across the board raises last week of $7,200 for their officers. Starting pay was
increased by $8,000. Again, please refer to the chief’s memo for more details. These starting salary gaps cascade
negatively into all the other pay classes (e.g., police officer/officer first class, senior police officer, corporal, master
police officer, sergeant, and lieutenant).
Market Salary Impacts in Other Town Departments – Starting Salary Comparisons to the Region
These challenges are not limited to our police department as most town departments have been impacted, too.
For example, the construction boom has made hiring engineers and staff with technical skills such as equipment
operation, water and sewer line work, and others hard to hire since the private sector is paying high wages for this
type of work.
To get a snapshot of how the starting salaries for Hillsborough’s non-police positions compared to the market,
without doing the extensive compensation & classification study, samples were taken from the North Carolina
League of Municipalities Salary Survey released in late 2021. Given time constraints, comparisons were made to
just the starting salary ranges for municipalities in the region against 12 benchmark positions in Hillsborough.
Hillsborough’s benchmark positions included four different operator and technician classifications that had up to
three levels (e.g., equipment operator I, II, and III). Having data for an Operator I is an excellent indicator where the
Operators II & III compare. Thus, the sample survey reasonably covered 20 non-police positions from salary grades
1 – 12. There are 55 total position classes in these grades, with 50 of those being non-sworn police classifications.
Thus, a sample of 20 of 50 positions (40%) is a significant sample size.
There are 75 total position classes in the town’s Classification and Pay Plan that is attached (Grades 1 – 24). The
sample focused on grades 1 – 12 since they included the largest number of positions, in many cases the most
technical, public facing, service delivery focused positions, and are the positions most in need of adjustment. While
issues and concerns exist in Grades 13 – 24, they are less severe than Grades 1 – 12.
The 18 non-police positions in Grades 13 - 24 are all highly technical, division or department heads. In general,
while some adjustments appear necessary for starting grades, as well as salaries, there do not appear to be any
severe cases that would necessitate action now beyond a $2,000 adjustment that can’t wait until the study is
completed. There are also plenty of positions in these grades where compensation is strong compared to the
market. It’s important to note that that many employees in Grades 13 – 24, due to their skillsets and experience,
are susceptible to recruitment from other organizations – we’ve lost key staff in recent years due to this occurring.
The sample indicates Hillsborough’s starting salaries for benchmark positions (non-police) are about $6,700 less
than market. Gaps between Hillsborough’s starting salary range and market ranged from $0 to $15,000 below
market. Most gaps fell into the $3,000 to $8,000 shortfall range. It’s important to note than just because starting
salaries are lower does not necessarily mean that actual employee salaries are lower, but it’s an indicator that a
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 4 of 6
gap and problems exist. Thus, the gaps in all other town starting salaries in Grades 1 – 12 is similar to what is being
faced with police officers.
The lower starting points are part of the reason we are experiencing frequent compression issues when trying to
hire and set salaries when making job offers. This is a significant problem that if not addressed between now and
pay plan implementation by August/September will force human resources and management to continue making
many isolated decisions on how/if/how much to do in “after-action salary adjustments” for existing employees in
compression.
Difficult decisions are regularly being made as to which employee positions get included in an adjustment. For
example, does a possible adjustment apply to just employees in the division/operation where the new hire takes
place, with similar/related skills, or employees in the same or close pay grade? If an adjustment is made for a
Grade 4 position in the field, is that also extended to all Grade 4 employees even if their work is dramatically
different (e.g., office v. field)? The challenges of trying to determine where to draw the line are a Pandora’s Box.
This has turned into a very time-consuming task that is preventing human resources and management from
attending to other issues.
Rationale for the across-the-board increase amounts for sworn police and all other positions
Organizations often use flat percentage increases when making across the board raises or compression
adjustments. In addition to being simple, the primary reasons for the recommendation to make flat dollar amount
raises ($4,000 for sworn police and $2,000 for non-police positions) is to do the following:
1) Provide higher percentage increases to employees in the entry to mid-level Grades as those are the
positions that seem to have the biggest market gap.
2) Employees in the entry to mid-level grades get the higher percentage increases. Cost of living impact from
inflation and/or falling behind market pay in the region disproportionately affects these Grades (i.e., the
cost of milk going up affects everyone the same regardless of grade).
3) The flat amount has the benefit of NOT creating additional compression issues since existing spacing
between positions is maintained.
4) This provides time for the study to develop recommendations to address the various internal equity issues
that may exist.
Rationale for Proposed Market Adjustment Amounts ($4,000 sworn-police officers, $2,000 all other employees)
• Question: If the market baseline for starting police salaries is $50,000, why not make that $6,000 adjustment
now to starting salaries AND provide $6,000 across the board raises for all officers?
o Internal equity, adequate justification, and ability to implement pay study. The larger raise amount
would create more internal equity issues within the HPD and make them even more expensive to
correct. Pay imbalances get created over time due to the timing of how some employees work their
way up through promotions, timing of raises, etc. There are also employees in positions that getting
more than $4,000 would go beyond market justifications, thus making the overall cost of implementing
the TJCOG salary study unnecessarily more expensive. This makes it more difficult to implement the
recommended plans. It appears an amount much less than $4,000 would not adequately keep the
salaries reasonably competitive through the ranks compared to the market (i.e., would leave too large
of a gap). From a credibility standpoint, $4,000 is still a significant incremental move and signals to
officers the town recognizes the issues involved, has taken quick action in terms of the market rate
adjustments, as well as having a compensation and classification study in process.
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 5 of 6
o Cost. Funds included in the FY22-24 budget and financial plan are adequate to cover the recommended
adjustments.
• Question: If the sample survey shows that many town positions are just as far behind as police, why isn’t the
market adjustment for all positions the same at $4,000?
o Limited survey data. The snapshot survey only looked at starting salaries. While an indicator of pay
issues, starting salaries is just one factor to be weighed in a comprehensive study. There are almost 70
town position classifications that are non-sworn police, so there are still significant gaps that would
make it hard to justify larger adjustments. The police data is more applicable since there are a large
percentage of HPD employees that are close to the starting salary amounts. The gaps between senior
officer positions such as corporals, master police officers, sergeants, and lieutenants are often
predictably incremental in how they increase.
o Internal equity, adequate justification, and ability to implement pay study. The same rationale shared
above in the police discussion also applies here. While there are many employees whose salaries
should be adjusted due to market gaps, there are plenty where anything beyond the proposed $2,000
adjustment cannot be justified. Thus, to make best use of available funds and help fund ultimate
implementation of the proposed pay plan, the limit was set at $2,000.
o Cost. Funds included in the FY22-24 budget and financial plan are adequate to cover the recommended
adjustments.
Financial impacts:
All costs include salary and retirement-related contributions (FICA, 401K, and retirement system).
• Police (29 sworn, 2 non-sworn)
o Remainder of FY22: $56,250
o Annualized cost starting FY23: $150,000
o Funding in the FY22-24 budget & financial plan for market rate adjustments covers all three years of
expenses at $150,000/yr.
• General Fund (34.15 FTE positions)
o Remainder of FY22: $32,016
o Annualized cost starting FY23: $85,375
o Funding in the FY22-24 budget & financial plan for market rate adjustments covers/exceeds expenses
for each year at $70,000, $105,000, and $140,000. Surplus funds can be used to pay for remaining
implementation costs associated with the TCJOG compensation and classification plan.
• Water & Sewer Fund (34.15 FTE positions)
o Remainder of FY22: $34,078
o Annualized cost starting FY23: $90,875
o Funding in the FY22-24 budget & financial plan provides $20,000/year for market rate adjustments.
Thus, about a $14,000 shortfall exists for FY22. Savings due to vacancies can likely be used to fund this
amount. If not, a budget amendment can be done to fund via a contingency or retained earnings
appropriations. FY23 and FY24 will require approximately $70,000 more per year than is currently in
the plan.
• Stormwater Fund (3.0 FTE positions)
AGENDA ABSTRACT | 6 of 6
o Remainder of FY22: $2,813
o Annualized cost starting FY23: $7,500
o Funding was not included in the FY22-24 budget & financial plan for market rate adjustments. Thus, a
budget amendment may be necessary for FY22. A funding sources for FY23-24 will be identified in the
budget process.
Staff recommendation and comments:
The town manager recommends the six steps outlined in the “action requested” section. Detailed explanations,
data, and additional information are found in the attachments.
MEMORANDUM
To: Town Manager Eric Peterson
From: Chief Duane Hampton
Date: January 14, 2022
Subject: Police Salaries and Staffing
SUMMARY: Competition for qualified candidates has never been higher than it is right now.
Over the past few years, salaries in our peer organizations have been climbing, and Hillsborough
has now found ourselves in a position of being behind the most of peer organizations in terms of
starting pay. These two factors put us at a significant disadvantage in trying to attract and retain
the best employees.
It is my belief that we need to take some kind of significant step now to increase our base salary,
and additional steps in the near future to remain competitive.
History
Over the last decade we have seen competition for talent and diverse candidates in law
enforcement increase significantly. We are seeing far fewer people applying for the profession,
and officers are much more mobile, and more willing to jump from agency to agency seeking
better compensation. Since the events of 2020, this situation has only gotten worse, and agencies
are actively recruiting and trying to attract candidates from other agencies.
Historically our most direct competitors, and those that we have lost candidates and officers to,
have been those in our local area (Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Orange County Sheriff’s office),
agencies in Alamance County (Burlington, Mebane), Durham County and Durham City, and
those in Wake county (Cary, Apex, Morrisville, Wake Forest).
In FY16 a Classification study was done and as a result our starting officer salary was raised to
$39,203, which made us competitive with our peers at that time. By July of 2017 (only eight
months later) we found that our starting salary had already fallen behind many of our
surrounding peers. To stay competitive, we again raised our starting salary to $43,227 which, at
that time, put us ahead of most of our peers and direct competitors.
Current Pay Comparisons
Now, as we enter 2022, we find ourselves again being behind, in some cases significantly, to
those same peer organizations, including some that have never been ahead of us pay-wise.
Attachment 1: Salary History provides a view to the current state of things based on research we
have done. It shows that in the last five years, our starting salary has only increased $687 from
the 2017 level, while all of the peers surveyed had increased more, with many of those increases
being significant in the $5,000-$10,000 range. In addition, many of the agencies are also
currently looking at doing a pay study and tendentially additional increases.
As an example, Burlington, Carrboro, and Chapel Hill are a few of our most direct competitors.
127. North Churton St. Hillsborough, NC 27278 (919) 296-9500
Burlington and Chapel Hill offer opportunities for advancement and specialized positions that we
cannot, but they have always lagged behind us in pay. Burlington has raised their starting salary
$8,000 putting us $2,500 behind them. Chapel Hill is potentially raising their starting salaries to
$50,000 in February, putting us $6,000 behind them. Carrboro is comparable in size and
opportunities but has always lagged behind us in pay, but as of the 15th of this month, they will
be almost $3,000 ahead of us.
Also, as a reminder, while we have made improvements, we still face issues in attracting
candidates due to our benefits costing the employees more in some areas such as family medical
care than what many peers offer.
Staffing
We have had significant ups and downs in our staffing over the past few years. At one point in
2020 we were down 20% of our staff. Fortunately, there were a lot of good lateral officers in the
market at that time and we were able to hire several very quickly. Since then, we were able to
rehire two officers that had left the profession and have successfully hired several recruit officers
to attend BLET. It is important to note that it takes about 9 months for a recruit to complete
training and be ready to work independently. When adding the time to conduct interviews,
assessments, and background check processes, it takes about one year from when an applicant
begins the process to becoming independent as a patrol officer. As an additional point, we have
seen a significant decline in the number of qualified laterals applying.
As if to highlight that point, in November we lost two experienced, diverse officers to Mebane,
including one who was a lateral we had hired less than 12 months before from Durham.
We have two recruits that just completed BLET and will be entering field training, so when they
are done (3 months) we will be back at full staff. However, we have one retirement that has been
announced for the end of March (Matthews) and one we anticipate by December (Corbett). We
do have two other recruits that started BLET this week and will potentially be ready for
independent duty in September if all goes well.
At the moment our staffing situation is stable, but that can change with little notice. Additionally,
we are becoming a very young department and would significantly benefit from attracting some
experienced lateral officers.
Conclusion
Having a starting salary significantly behind many of our peers is going to have a direct and
negative impact on our hiring and retention. We are already facing many peers that have raised
their starting salary to near or above $50,000 and most of them are also agencies that offer better
benefits costs and opportunities that we cannot.
I realize we have a study planned for later this year, but I am very concerned that waiting to take
any steps until that is completed will cost us personnel and opportunities.
Based on what our peers are doing, I think it is clear that some kind of significant adjustment is
needed for us to stay competitive and I believe we must make at least some kind of adjustment
now in response to the changing environment around us. I believe making a $4,000-$5,000
across the board increase would still be less than what we are going to find is ultimately needed
but would send a strong message and be viewed favorably by employees who may be looking at
leaving. Ultimately, I don’t see any way we are going to be able to avoid raising our starting
salary at least to if not over the $50,000 level in this current market. Based on our research and
the trends across the profession, everyone in our area that wants to attract and retain good
officers is going to end up there.
127. North Churton St. Hillsborough, NC 27278 (919) 296-9500
Attachment 1: Salary History
Agency 2017
salary
Current
salary
Increase
since 2017
+/-
Compared to
Hillsborough
Pay study in
progress/planned?
Hillsborough $43,227 $43,914 $687 Yes
Morrisville $41,135 $51,544 $10,409 +$7,630 Yes
Apex $41,442 $51,838 $10,396 +$7,924 Yes
Cary $41,267 $51,000 $9,733 +$7,086 Yes
Wake Forest $41,702 $50,243* $8,541 +$6,329 Yes
Burlington $38,272 $46,500 $8,228 +$2,586 Just Completed
Chapel Hill $42,000 $50,000** $6,000 +$3,086 Yes
Carrboro $42,422 $46,878 $4,000 +$2,964 Maybe
Durham $40,740 $44,792*** $3,793 +$878 Unknown
Holly Springs $44,457 $47,932 $3,475 +$4,018 Yes
Mebane $39,818 $42,254 $2,436 -$1,660 Yes
Fuquay Varina $43,469 $45,252 $1,983 +$1,338 Unknown
Orange
County $39,978 $41,177 $1,199 -$2,737 Unknown
Durham
County $39,343 $40,523 $1,180 -$3,391 Yes
Agencies in italics represent those we have lost officers or candidates to
* Wake Forest does a study every 3 years and is currently doing one. They anticipate a
possible increase to $52,755 (not reflected in the chart above).
** Chapel Hill has just completed a study and the current salary number is based on their
anticipated increase.
*** Durham City, current recruit salary is $38,800. They have just requested the initial recruit
salary be raised to $42,593. Our understanding was that once a recruit completes BLET
they get a 5% raise which would move their base sworn salary to $44,792. On some of
the information listed they have their police officer base listed as $46,998, so we are not
sure if the increase from recruit to officer has changed.
Carrboro is doing an across the board $4,000 increase effective 1/15/22. That is reflected
in their salary in the chart.
Durham County SO has just completed some kind of study and has plans for some kind
of increase in the very near future (possibly announced this week) but would not tell us
what.
NOTE: The three agencies that are behind us in pay: Orange County, Durham County and Mebane, have
all been able to successfully recruit away officers from us in the last 2 years. While their posted starting
salaries are low, they appear to have significant leeway in what they are able to offer.
Current FY22 Classification & Pay Plan
Salary
Grade Minimum Midpoint Maximum
FLSA
Status
Class
Code Classification
1 33,209 42,571 51,934 N 0100 CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE
1 33,209 42,571 51,934 N 0101 METER SERVICES TECHNICIAN
1 33,209 42,571 51,934 N 0102 UTILITY MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN I
2 34,769 44,600 54,431 N 0204 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TECHNICIAN
2 34,769 44,600 54,431 N 0205 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SPECIALIST
2 34,769 44,600 54,431 N 0206 EQUIPMENT OPERATOR I
2 34,769 44,600 54,431 N 0207 UTILITY MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN II
2 34,769 44,600 54,431 N 0208 LEAD CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE
3 36,408 46,730 57,052 N 0304 EQUIPMENT OPERATOR II
3 36,408 46,730 57,052 N 0305 SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SPECIALIST
3 36,408 46,730 57,052 N 0307 UTILITY MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN III
3 36,408 46,730 57,052 N 0308 WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR I
3 36,408 46,730 57,052 N 0309 WATER PLANT OPERATOR I
4 38,128 48,967 59,805 N 0403 CREW LEADER/EQUIPMENT OPERATOR III
4 38,128 48,967 59,805 N 0405 PLANNING TECHNICIAN
4 38,128 48,967 59,805 N 0406 UTILITY SYSTEMS MECHANIC I
4 38,128 48,967 59,805 N 0407 WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR II
4 38,128 48,967 59,805 N 0408 WATER PLANT OPERATOR II
4 38,128 48,967 59,805 N 0409 PLANT MAINTENANCE MECHANIC I
4 38,128 48,967 59,805 N 0410 PLANT MECHANIC
5 39,934 51,315 62,695 N 0507 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN
5 39,934 51,315 62,695 N 0509 UTILITY SYSTEMS MECHANIC II
5 39,934 51,315 62,695 N 0510 PLANT MAINTENANCE MECHANIC II
6 41,831 53,781 65,730 N 0608 LABORATORY TECHNICIAN/WATER PLANT OPERATOR III
6 41,831 53,781 65,730 N 0609 UTILITY SYSTEMS MECHANIC III
6 41,831 53,781 65,730 N 0610 WASTEWATER LABORATORY SUPERVISOR
6 41,831 53,781 65,730 N 0611 WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR III
6 41,831 53,781 65,730 N 0612 WATER PLANT OPERATOR III
6 41,831 53,781 65,730 N 0613 PLANT MAINTENANCE MECHANIC III
7 43,823 56,370 68,916 N 0708 BACKFLOW/FOG SPECIALIST
7 43,823 56,370 68,916 N 0711 FLEET MECHANIC
7 43,823 56,370 68,916 N 0712 OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE
8 45,914 59,088 72,262 N 0804 METER SERVICES SUPERVISOR
8 45,914 59,088 72,262 N 0806 COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST
8 45,914 59,088 72,262 N 0807 STORMWATER PROGRAM COORDINATOR
8 45,914 59,088 72,262 E 0808 BILLING & CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPERVISOR
9 48,110 61,942 75,775 N 0908 CHIEF WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR
9 48,110 61,942 75,775 E 0910 FINANCIAL ANALYST
9 48,110 61,942 75,775 E 0911 MANAGEMENT ANALYST
9 48,110 61,942 75,775 E 0912 PLANNER
9 48,110 61,942 75,775 N 0913 UTILITIES INSPECTOR
10 50,415 64,940 79,464 E 1013 HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST
10 50,415 64,940 79,464 N 1014 POLICE CORPORAL
10 50,415 64,940 79,464 E 1016 WEB DEVELOPER/ASSISTANT COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER
10 50,415 64,940 79,464 N 1017 LEAD UTILITIES INSPECTOR
10 50,415 64,940 79,464 N 1020 FACILITIES COORDINATOR
Regular (Non-Law Enforcement) Positions
Updated/Proposed - FY22 Classsification & Pay Plans1) Non-Law Enforcement, 2) Sworn Law Enforcement
11 52,836 68,087 83,337 E 1107 UTILITY MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
11 52,836 68,087 83,337 E 1108 UTILITY SYSTEM SUPERVISOR
11 52,836 68,087 83,337 E 1109 BUDGET & MANAGEMENT ANALYST
12 55,378 71,391 87,404 E 1211 FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
12 55,378 71,391 87,404 E 1213 SENIOR PLANNER
13 58,047 74,860 91,674 E 1301 TOWN CLERK/HR TECH
14 60,849 78,504 96,158 E 1407 SAFETY & RISK MANAGER
14 60,849 78,504 96,158 E 1409 CIVIL ENGINEER
15 63,791 82,329 100,866 E 1507 UTILITY SYSTEM SUPERINTENDENT
15 63,791 82,329 100,866 E 1508 WASTEWATER PLANT SUPERINTENDENT
15 63,791 82,329 100,866 E 1509 WATER PLANT SUPERINTENDENT
16 66,881 86,345 105,809
17 70,125 90,562 111,000 E 1701 COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER
17 70,125 90,562 111,000 E 1702 PUBLIC SPACES & SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER
17 70,125 90,562 111,000 E 1703 PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER
17 70,125 90,562 111,000 E 1704 HR MANAGER
17 70,125 90,562 111,000 E 1705 STORMWATER & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MANAGER
17 70,125 90,562 111,000 E 1706 IT MANAGER
18 73,531 94,990 116,450 E 1801 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER
19 77,108 99,640 122,172
20 80,863 104,522 128,181 E 2002 BUDGET DIRECTOR
21 84,806 109,648 134,490
22 88,947 115,031 141,114 E 2201 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR
23 93,294 120,682 148,070 E 2301 FINANCE DIRECTOR
23 93,294 120,682 148,070 E 2302 UTILITIES DIRECTOR
24 97,859 126,616 155,374 E 2400 ASSISTANT TOWN MANAGER/COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
Salary
Grade Minimum Midpoint Maximum
FLSA
Status
Class
Code Classification
P1 48,000 61,174 74,348 N P101 POLICE OFFICER/POLICE OFFICER FIRST CLASS
P2 50,110 63,942 77,775 N P201 SENIOR POLICE OFFICER
P3 52,415 66,940 81,464 N P301 MASTER POLICE OFFICER
P4 57,378 73,391 89,404 N P401 POLICE SERGEANT
P5 62,849 80,504 98,158 E P501 POLICE LIEUTENANT
P6 95,294 122,682 150,070 E P601 CHIEF OF POLICE
Sworn Law Enforcement Officer Positions