HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-04-01 Study SessionqFMAS Council Study Session Agenda
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION AGENDA
Monday, April 1, 2024
Council Chambers,1175 E Main Street
*This is joint study session with Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Live stream via rvtv.sou.edu select RVTV Prime. Recorded meetings are available on our website.
Public testimony will be accepted for both public forum items and agenda items.
If you would like to submit written testimony or if you wish to speak electronically during the meeting,
please complete the Public Testimony Form no later than 10 a.m. the day of the meeting.
5:30 p.m. Study Session
Public Input (15 minutes - Public input or comment on City business not included on
the agenda)
2. DEI Assessment and Strategic Plan
3. SB 1537 - UGB Expansion
4. Homeless Services Masterplan Subcommittee update
5. Adjournment of Study Session
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate
in this meeting, please contact the City Manager's office at 541.488.6002 (TTY phone number
1.800.735.2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1).
Page 1of1
�r
.::� Council Study Session
April 1, 2024
Agenda Item
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility & Organizational Culture Assessment
Results & Next Steps
From
Molly Taylor
Human Resources Director
Sabrina Cotta
Interim City Manager/Deputy City Manager
Contact
Molly.talyor@ashland.or.us sabrina.cotta@ashland.or.us
Item Type
Requested by Council ❑ Update ❑ Request for Direction ❑ Presentation
SUMMARY
In June of 2022 Council gave direction to conduct a DEI assessment of the City organization as recommended
by the Social, Equity and Racial Justice Commission. Partnering with Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC the City has
completed the Assessment and has a strategic plan and action items to address moving forward.
POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED
• Excellence in governance and City services.
• Respect for the citizens we serve, for each other and for the work we do.
• Belonging through mutual respect and openness, inclusion, and equity.
BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In June of 2022 the City Council appropriated $40,000 to conduct an internal DEI assessment of the City
Organization. The RFP was published December 1, 2022, on both the City of Ashland website and the
Oregonbuys.gov which is the preferred site for posting all RFPs published in Oregon. The deadline to ask
questions about the RFP was January 16, 2023, and answers were posted on the City's website. The deadline to
respond to the RFP was February 17, 2023. In august of 2023 the City began engagement with Paradigm Public
Affairs, LLC to engage in focus groups, one on one interviews and conduct survey. Paradigm Public provided the
results in February 2024.
FISCAL IMPACTS
$40,000 was budgeted for the assessment. Additional investments will be needed to address some action items
coming out of this strategic plan to be addressed at a later date and the next biennium.
SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS
The City Manager's office and Human Resources Department will continue to work towards implementing the
recommendations and action found in the report.
REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS
• Ashland DEIA & Culture Report
• Implementation Plan
• Recommendation Summary & Priorities
• RFP Response
Page 1ofl 1911
�r
1$_6 76�_
y� 1 Ilf
City of Ashland, e Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and
Accessibility and Organizational Culture
Assessment
"^ r
w
February 2024
1.�
Table of Contents
THANK YOU AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 4
INTRODUCTION 5
METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH 6
QUALITATIVE DATA 7
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS 8
LIMITATIONS 9
DATA SAMPLE 9
Participant Demographic Summary 10
THE ASHLAND COMMUNITY 11
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS 13
POSITIVE TAKEAWAYS 13
PART 1: WORK VALUES AND ACCOUNTABILITY 15
WORK VALUES 16
COMPETING PERSPECTIVES ON WORK VALUES 16
Finding 1: Values and Behaviors of Being Proactive, Showing Initiative, and Personal Responsibility
are Important to Employees, But May Stifle Creativity and Innovation 19
RECOMMENDATION 1 19
RECOMMENDATION 2 19
ACCOUNTABILITY 20
Individual Accountability for Inappropriate Behavior 21
Finding 2: Employees feel accountable for producing good work, but don't perceive the City
holding itself accountable for sustaining a fair work environment.
23
RECOMMENDATION 3
23
RECOMMENDATION 4
23
RECOMMENDATION 5
23
RECOMMENDATION 6
24
Connection Between Personal Accountability and Work Product
24
Finding 3: Some employees view DEIA as a low priority that negatively impacts accountability and
work productivity. 26
RECOMMENDATION 8 26
Microaggressions and Gender 26
Finding 4: Microaggressions throughout the City tend to be aimed toward people who identify as
female. 29
RECOMMENDATION 9 29
RECOMMENDATION 10 29
RECOMMENDATION 11 29
PART II: ORGANIZATIONAL TRUST 30
TRUST BETWEEN EMPLOYEES AND THE CITY 31
TRUST BETWEEN EMPLOYEES AND DIRECT SUPERVISORS 31
Finding 5: Strengthening and supporting leadership skills, including conflict management, is needed
to resolve team building by direct supervisors.
35
RECOMMENDATION 12
35
RECOMMENDATION 13
35
Communication Deficits
35
Finding 6: Communication deficits erode trust which weakens trust between employees, supervisors,
and City leadership. 37
RECOMMENDATION 14 37
RECOMMENDATION 15 38
TRUST BETWEEN EMPLOYEES AND THE LEADERSHIP TEAM
38
Finding 7: City leadership should clarify and define goals, objectives, and metrics with a focus on
measurement and planned incremental change for the future. 40
RECOMMENDATION 17 40
RECOMMENDATION 18 41
DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT VERSUS INCLUSIVE LEADERSHIP
41
Finding 8: Shift attention toward strategies that focus on inclusive leadership and away from
diversity management. 42
RECOMMENDATION 19 42
PART III: ORGANIZATIONAL COMFORT, WELCOMENESS, AND RESPECT 43
ORGANIZATIONAL COMFORT
44
Finding 9: Impediments to a psychologically safe work environment are connected to race, ethnicity,
gender, and gender identity.
48
RECOMMENDATION 20
48
RECOMMENDATION 21
48
RECOMMENDATION 22
48
ORGANIZATIONAL WELCOMENESS
48
Finding 10: Most employees perceive the City as welcoming, but there are some barriers. 51
2
RECOMMENDATION 23
RESPECT and CLIMATE
51
51
Finding 11: Some employees fear retaliation by supervisors or leadership, but not as defined by
Federal or State labor laws. 53
RECOMMENDATION 24
TRUST AS AN INDICATOR OF ORGANIZATIONAL RESPECT
53
53
Finding 12: High levels of trust and respect for supervisors throughout the organization creates
opportunity to strengthen DEIA as part of organizational culture. 54
RECOMMENDATION 25 54
CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS
55
3
THAN K YOU AN D ACKNOWLEDG EM ENT
Paradigm Public Affairs is honored to have had the opportunity to partner with the City
of Ashland in its efforts to create and sustain a welcoming work environment and a
culture of belonging for City employees. In our time with city leadership and
employees, we were impressed by the deep pride in Ashland and a real passion for
diversity, equity, and inclusion exhibited by so many City employees. Special thanks
go to City Leadership, who were open to candid and frank conversations about
diversity, reviewing policies, and other significant efforts that help instill belongness
and support DEIA as part of the organizational culture.
Paradigm extends our thanks to city leaders and employees who shared their personal
accounts and perceptions of organizational culture and belonging within the City of
Ashland. We recognize the positive intent of City leadership and applaud their
collective efforts to embrace inclusion and respond to the needs of the Ashland
community in a proactive and meaningful way. As the City moves toward a dynamic
and fully inclusive future, we were privileged to have the opportunity to participate in
this important and exciting process.
= PARADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Tanya Settles, Ph.D.
Matt Jones, Ph.D.
Judith Fitzgerald, J.D.
Joyce Haines, Ph.D.
4
INTRODUCTION
In early 2023 the City of Ashland commissioned Paradigm Public Affairs to conduct a
culture and organizational assessment that included an evaluation of belonging and
culture through the lens of diversity, equity, inclusion, and access (DEIA). Throughout
the fall of 2023, many employees helped facilitate our assessment by ensuring that we
had access to staff and resources; offering guidance and feedback throughout the
process; helping to organize events to inform staff about the project; and encouraging
candid engagement with our team. Paradigm Public Affairs (Paradigm) collected and
analyzed qualitative and quantitative data, formed findings, and suggested strategies
to enhance organizational culture. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations
are those of our Paradigm team.
To achieve the goal of better understanding the internal workings of the City of
Ashland from the perspective of staff through the lens of DEIA, Paradigm followed
these steps:
• Conducted a baseline review of polices and operating procedures for City
governance with a focus on talent management and human resources
processes.
• Facilitated focus groups with employees.
• Engaged with leaders, staff, and staff through individual interviews.
• Developed and deployed a customized survey to employees and analyzed those
data.
To support the goal of assessing organizational culture, we evaluated public
documents and other materials related to staff engagement in service to the
community. These multiple sources of data were coded, analyzed, and organized into
themes that provide the foundation for findings and recommendations throughout this
document.
The perception of community members about actions of Ashland city government was
outside the scope of this project. Rather, our assessment focused upon four areas: (1)
the extent to which DEIA goals and values of city government are demonstrated as
integral components of the City's organizational culture; (2) any unconscious
assumptions about how staff conduct their work; (3) any potential for bias in
organizational culture related to employees' perceptions of welcomeness and
belonging; and (4) opportunities to improve the working environment for staff.
5
METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH
Paradigm followed Edgar Schein's model' that explores organizational culture to gain
insight about how City government works, the degree to which the City supports a
welcoming work environment, and what that means for community services. Schein
viewed organizational culture as a powerful social force that is largely invisible, yet
significantly influences financial performance, employee attitudes, and organizational
effectiveness. Culture has greater impact on behaviors beyond formal control systems,
procedures, and authority; therefore, understanding and managing organizational
culture is essential for achieving desired organizational outcomes.
Our Paradigm process began by first examining tertiary features of the organizational
culture and workforce that included the behaviors, practices, and structure of Ashland
City government. We first examined elements that are seen by people, organizations,
and partners that interact with the City. We looked at a variety of information including
public documents and resources available to community members through the City's
website, local media reports, and social media resources.
Next, we looked more deeply at the goals and values of the workforce through a series
of personal conversations, focus groups, and survey data collection. This process gave
us insight about whether or how DEIA may (or may not) align with employee work
values and experience. Finally, at the deepest level, we looked for unconscious
assumptions and bias to gain greater insight into (1) ways that staff interact with each
other and the community, (2) how policies and operational procedures are executed,
and (3) opportunities for bias related to race, gender, and identity. Schein's model
adapted for this project is depicted in Figure 1. This figure represents the theoretical
roadmap that we followed in assessing organizational culture and belonging at City of
Ashland government.
' Schein, E. H. (1983). The role of the founder in creating organizational culture. Organizational
dynamics, 12(1), 13-28. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/O090261683900232
Schein, E., & Twain, M. (2023). Listening as Reflective Practice. Communication for Constructive Workplace
Conflict, 37.
n.
Organizational Culture
Through a Lens of ,/ N
Equity, Diversity, and Things
Inclusion We Can 5
Goals an
Values
PARADIGM
P.-I-PUBLic AFFAIRS
Behaviors, Actions, �I
Structure
dBeliefs, Aspirations, Goals of
Government
Unconscious
Things We Take for Granted
Assumptions Implicit Biases and
Preferences
and Bias
Our mixed -methods DEI assessment of organizational culture and belonging consisted
of both qualitative data (interviews, documents, and focus groups) and quantitative
data (a customized survey delivered to all City employees and data records in City
files).
QUALITATIVE DATA
In addition to a review of documents related to operations and people management,
internal policies, and other public facing documentation, the Paradigm Team
conducted qualitative data collection strategies that included private, one-on-one
interviews with staff and leaders as well as a series of focus groups that were organized
groups that included:
• Managers and Supervisors.
• Parks and Recreation Employees.
• Public Safety Employees.
• Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) Employees.
• Women.
• Randomly Selected Participants.
The data we obtained from these efforts served two purposes. First, the data were
collected, coded, and analyzing using a thematic analysis procedure as a stand-alone
7
data source that informed the narrative of the employee experience at Ashland.
Second, the information and insight gleaned from these efforts created opportunities
to scrutinize certain aspects of organizational culture and belonging through the survey
that was delivered later in the process.
The Paradigm Team met in Ashland from October 23-25, 2023 to collect data from
employees through interviews, focus groups, and informal conversation. These data
were transcribed and analyzed using an inductive coding strategy followed by thematic
analysis. We recognized that staff participation in focus groups was somewhat lower
than expected; invitations to attend a focus group were voluntary and not required by
the City. The many explanations for low participation may include "DEI Fatigue",
disinterest, or hesitancy to engage in face-to-face encounters with our team and each
other to discuss, potentially sensitive topics and experiences. With the perspective
that low, or no responses are still meaningful data, we used the information we gained
to customize the survey instrument and included open-ended questions to gain more
qualitative data that provided a rich context and descriptions of experiences and
perspectives of employees. Over 65 survey participants offered additional insight
through these qualitative questions, which supplemented information collected during
focus groups and multi -participant discussion sessions.
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
Next, we used qualitative data and preliminary findings, along with feedback and input
from City and Department leaders, to deploy a full -census survey. Organized around
constructs related to DEIA, organizational culture, and belonging, this survey focused
upon these categories:
• Trust.
• Work Values.
• Accountability.
• Inclusion and Respect.
• Welcomeness and Belonging.
In total, 140 City employees participated in the survey. The full survey instrument is
included in Appendix A. Our data collection window was open between mid -
November and mid -December 2023.
Data from this survey were largely analyzed for measures of central tendency. Multiple
layers of data analysis were conducted to gain insight related to quantitative data
0
collected through the survey. We also constructed pivot tables, that allowed us to
compare and analyze how different groups of employees responded to each question.
These "data cuts" included an analysis by demographic elements of DEIA as well as
position and role within the organization.
LIMITATIONS
The rate of participation in this survey was robust, with approximately 64 percent of
City staff participating. This level of staff participation in the survey provided results
that are generally representative of City government. However, even with relatively
high participation rates, self-selection bias in data collection may be a factor in
interpreting results. In other words, the number of people who had a strong opinion
about DEIA (either heavily supportive or heavily critical of DEIA initiatives) may have
impacted the overall results of data analysis. We also recognized that about one-third
of survey participants did not identify one or more categories of race, ethnicity, or
gender. As a result, we were not able to confidently report on differences and
similarities in responses based on demographic information without risking the
inadvertent identification of individual participants, although we did take this
information into account in formulating results and recommendations.
Finally, survey fatigue may have impacted results, though it is not possible to know to
what extent survey fatigue may be a factor. People are requested to respond to
surveys for multiple reasons that range from customer experience, perspectives at
work, and quality of services, among many other reasons. For many people in the
United States, responding to a survey can be a weekly ordeal. The phenomenon of
data mining overall may have also impacted response rates or data accuracy and
viability if participants were concerned that their identities could be disclosed.
DATA SAMPLE
Although not every one of the 140 employees who took the DEIA and Culture Survey
answered every question, employees from all departments and functional work areas
within the City were represented. The greatest number of participants work in the Fire,
Public Works, Police, and Parks and Recreation Departments.
E
Participant Demographic Summary
• Nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of responses came from staff.
• About 17 percent were from supervisors.
• About 18 percent of responses were from directors, leaders, or managers.
• Average length of service: 10 years.
• Most participants (over 98 percent) are fulltime employees.
• Most participants identified as male (58 percent).
• Most respondents do not experience a disability (physical, mental, or emotional)
that limits one or more major life activities (87 percent).
• Over 10 percent of respondents have served in a branch of the military.
• About 5 percent of respondents are Latine. 2
ASHLAND GOVERNMENT WORKFORCE BY RACE
■ American
■ Anothei
3'�,
■ Two or more rac
7%
Sian
M
ve Hawaiian
ether Pacific
Islander
2%
z Latine (pronounced la -TEE -nay) is a gender -neutral form of the word Latino that was created by
LGBTQIA+, gender non -binary, and feminist communities in Spanish speaking countries to remove
gender from the word Latino. See callmelatine.com for additional information.
re
Racial and ethnic identity data of the Ashland workforce collected by the City and
collected by the Paradigm survey are substantially similar. However, over one-third (35
percent) of people who engaged in the survey did not identify one or more key
demographic characteristics. Although this group had a perspective or experience,
they felt important enough to share in the Paradigm survey, we conclude that they did
not disclose their race, ethnicity, and/or gender to prevent being personally identified.
THE ASHLAND COMMUNITY
Ashland is situated on the south side of Jackson County, about 15 miles from the
California border and on the south end of the Rogue Valley. With Southern Oregon
University (SOU) and the Oregon Shakespeare Festival, Ashland is a cultural center in
South Oregon. The economy is largely tourism based, with a unique collection of
galleries, retail stores, and locally owned businesses. Inside the city are world class
parks, such as Lithia Park, open spaces, and a paved intercity bike trail. The population
of Ashland is steady, with a minor population decrease, about 0.4 percent, between
2020 and 2022. The cost of housing in Ashland is relatively high compared to the rest
of the Rogue Valley, and most employees of the City live outside city boundaries.
Demographically, the community of Ashland resembles the local government
workforce representation, with some differences between the two.
Table 1: Community Demographics Compared to City Government Demographics
Comparing US Census Bureau reporting about the overall population of the Ashland
community and self -reported demographics from the survey, the City employs more
individuals who identify as Black, White, Veteran, or experiencing disability.
Conversely, the City employs fewer people who identify as female, Asian, Hispanic, or
other races.
s US Census Bureau Quickfacts: Ashland, City, Oregon. Retrieved 17 December 2023 from
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ashlandcityoregon/PST045222.
4 Data from City of Ashland EEO4 Report 2023.
5 Based on 2023 DEIA Culture and Belonging Survey data administered November— December, 2023.
Data presented does not include "blank" responses.
6 Estimated differences between community and workforce were calculated using US Census Bureau
data compared first to City of Ashland EEO4 Report when available, and when not, Culture Assessment
survey data.
7 As the City did not have data for Disability, we used the survey results in comparison to city
demographic trends to estimate the difference.
12
The City recognizes some key demographic differences between the workforce and the
community. In part, recent initiatives to encourage and sustain DEIA initiatives are
intended to close gaps so that the workforce more closely represents the community it
serves. It is important to note that demographic information alone does not denote
diversity. Comparative demographics are a starting point for conversations about
DEIA, but demographics alone do not indicate diversity, inclusion, or equity within a
government or other organization.
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS
At its core, this assessment analyzed organizational culture and the City's ability to
create and sustain an organizational culture of belonging and welcomeness. For that
reason, the Paradigm Team and City engaged in a process to scrutinize the elements
of organizational culture, determine how those elements intersect with diversity, equity,
inclusion, and access, and present a baseline measurement of the state of
organizational culture that includes DEIA. The presentation of findings for this
assessment are organized around key constructs of organizational culture and
belonging that include:
• Part 1: Work Values and Accountability
• Part 2: Organizational Trust
• Part 3: Organizational Comfort, Welcomeness, and Respect
Each of these key constructs were examined through a variety of data collection and
analytic strategies as described in the methodology section.
POSITIVE TAKEAWAYS
The purpose of this assessment was to analyze organizational culture and belonging
with a focus on diversity, equity, inclusion, and access. Therefore, while some
conclusions in this report appear critical, acknowledging the positive aspects of this
assessment is essential to reveal the entire picture. The City has made good progress
in creating and sustaining an inclusive organizational culture and work environment.
City of Ashland employees should be credited for their dedicated and outstanding
service to the community. Throughout our work with the City, we recognize that:
13
City employees, across all departments, programs, and agencies take great
pride in their roles as public servants and place great value on an ethos of hard
work.
2. The majority of staff at the City believe that DEIA makes the City a better place
to work. We also saw evidence of progress that strengthens DEIA as a part of
organizational culture in a way that values the contributions of the full workforce,
and at the same time recognizes perspectives and thoughts of people with
different experiences.
3. Some employees who are critical of the current organizational culture deserve
recognition for their candor, honesty, and courage in sharing these perspectives
with us.
4. Although Ashland, along with many cities throughout the United States, has
DEIA challenges, the many high points of the City of Ashland's organizational
culture -- a willingness to learn, genuine curiosity (even when people disagree
with one another) and dedication to service to the Ashland community -- should
be acknowledged and celebrated.
14
PART 1: WORK VALUES and ACCOUNTABILITY
The construct of work values was defined by looking at perceptions of goals and values
of work at the City of Ashland. These variables were connected to the middle tier of
values and beliefs in organizational culture as defined by Schein's model. Some
questions in the survey and focus groups were based on Hofstede's$ classic theory of
work values to reveal connections between organizational values and ways that
employees internalize them. In general, we wanted to understand how employees
perceive work values associated with coordination, proactivity, accountability for work
production, and personal responsibility as part of organizational culture.
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS ASSOCIATED WITH WORK VALUES
Work Values: Work values refer to the personal beliefs, attitudes, and principles that
guide an individual's behavior in the workplace. These values shape an individuals
perceptions of work and influence work -related decisions and actions.
Coordination: The process of organizing and synchronizing the efforts of multiple
individuals working together toward a common goal. Coordination includes elements
of clear communication channels, defining roles and responsibilities, and setting goals
and objectives. City coordination may refer to teams within work units (e.g, public
works crews) or multidisciplinary teams across the City.
Proactiveness: Proactivity means thinking in advance about opportunities, risks,
problems and when an individual forecasts a problem they start identifying solutions
before the problem occurs. This occurs on the employees' own initiative and without
anybody telling the employee to do it. Proactivity means initiative with an eye toward
avoiding or resolving problems before they occur.
Accountability: Willingly accepting responsibility for your own actions and
accomplishing the things you set out to do at work that may include tasks, projects, or
the way people interact with each other and the community.
Personal Responsibility: Personal responsibility is connected to accountability and
refers to executing duties and tasks at work with integrity, honesty, and caring about
the results.
8 Hofstede, G. (1985). The interaction between national and organizational value systems [1]. Journal of
management studies, 22(4), 347-357.
15
WORK VALUES
Throughout this survey, most measures for each construct were collected based on a 5-
point scale ranging from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). The neutral
point was designated as 3 (neither agree nor disagree). Across all questions related to
work values, the mean score was slightly lower than 3 (neutral) indicating that
disagreement with each statement trended slightly lower than neutral. Table 2
describes survey results from the question block about work values.
TABLE 2: Employee Perceptions of Work Values (n = 116, as percentages)
At the City of Ashland, we place great value on...
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Coordinating among different work teams
55.2
23.3
21.5
Every employee being proactive in their role
56.9
22.4
20.7
Employees using their initiative
68.1
18.1
13.0
Employees taking responsibility for their work
76.7
10.34
13.0
Showing our appreciation for the efforts of each
47.8
22.6
28.7
employee
Holding each other accountable for our actions
50.0
23.3
25.0
Sustaining an inclusive work environment
57.8
25.9
13.8
Making sure work teams include people with diverse
perspectives and experiences
40.6
37.1
7.8
Sustaining an inclusive work environment and making sure work teams include people
with diverse perspectives are generally viewed as important by staff. Compared to the
nearly 14 percent who view sustaining an inclusive work environment and roughly 8
percent who perceive diverse perspectives among work teams to be less than optimal,
there is an opportunity to improve in both areas. However, it is substantively less
critical than addressing accountability as reported by survey participants.
COMPETING PERSPECTIVES ON WORK VALUES
City employees expressed two distinct perspectives on work values:
1. Employees who welcome the many initiatives and efforts that strengthen DEI
and belonging throughout their service to the community view diversity and
inclusion as strengthening their capabilities in terms of collaborative and
proactive problem solving and vision.
IV
2. Employees who generally value equitable treatment of employees and
coworkers but prioritize emphasis on work production and "getting the job
done" do not appear to consistently see distinctions between identity groups or
perspectives because they limit their view of equity to treating everyone the
same, regardless of the outcome.
Both perspectives are important. Both have value despite a tendency for competition
between the two. Conversations with employees and the stories that some staff
members shared in the open-ended questions on the survey revealed an internal value
system that emphasizes "getting the job done" and a sentiment that is not overtly
discriminatory. At the same time, this perspective can de-emphasize the value of
different perspectives and experiences in the interest of work productivity. This
attitude explains some of the ambiguity around sustaining an inclusive work
environment and valuing diverse teams. Although employees see the value of diverse
and inclusive work environments, they prioritize "getting the work done" over diversity,
equity, and inclusion.
A critical mass of the workforce throughout the United States perceives the differences
between employees in terms of identity as mattering far less than the ties that bind
them related to work productivity. However, when people perceive colleagues as
different, there's a tendency to treat them as "others" rather than peers and coworkers.
As an example, we interpreted one survey participant's assertion that "The City needs
to focus on recruitment and retention before
focusing on inclusion. None of this will matter if "The City needs to focus on
you can't keep employees" to express good recruitment and retention before
intent to resolve the immediate need for hiring focusing on inclusion. None of
for open positions as a priority over inclusion. this will matter if you can't keep
employees".
In other words, the City's ability to get the work
done is of top importance, and DEIA can be -Survey participant
perceived as a secondary need. However, in
addition to the positive value of a work ethic that focuses on productivity; some
employees express their experiences with an "under the surface" belief that employees
who identify with affinity or identity groups are perceived as "others". Consequently,
some people experience otherness, particularly related to gender and gender identity.
Both phenomena are explored in greater detail in other parts of this report.
This belief, which we encountered frequently through both qualitative and quantitative
data collection, suggests some employees are early in DEIA development stages. In
17
general, some employees hold the concept of equity and equal treatment in high
regard, while simultaneously experiencing some challenges in recognizing that equality
and equity are not the same thing. Equality means each individual or group of people
is given the same resources or opportunities. Equity recognizes that each person has
different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to
reach an equal outcome.'
In the City of Ashland, some employees may have access to the same opportunities
(e.g., different staff opportunities throughout the City are posted to all employees), but
their professional outcomes may differ (e.g., women and racial/ethnic minorities may
not respond because they've experienced microaggressions at work). In situations like
this, some employees feel they've been put into the "other box" and don't feel
confident their ideas will be accepted or valued. For people who have been put in the
"other box", to participate in the shared value of excellence in work productivity,
means conforming with the dominant organizational culture. Consequently, some
employees may "code switch"10 and engage in language and behaviors that conform
to the majority while suppressing their individuality, expression, and perspective to do
so.
This perspective, which was not uncommon, introduces some specific challenges.
Throughout the City, some employees believe that equal treatment results in equitable
outcomes. However, "treating everyone the same" means that people who have
diverse experiences, perceptions, and ideas may hesitate to share these views with
team and individual contributors, consequently jeopardizing DEIA, as well as limiting
productivity, creativity, and innovation for the City. In addition, limited opportunities
for creativity and innovation are available when many City employees are struggling to
keep up with multiple work roles and assignments.
Sentiment from employees who perceive equity as characterized by "treating everyone
the same" also tend to perceive that DEIA initiatives are forced on them. Some staff
expressed a perception of greater division among employees because of DEIA
initiatives. Employees mentioned concerns about "reverse racism", or the idea that
emphasizing diversity, inclusion, and equity results in discriminatory practices against
9 Milken Institute School of Public Health
10 Code switching, in this context, means that members of a marginalized or underrepresented group
adapt and assimilate to the dominant environment around them. For more information about code
switching, see Washington -Harmon, T. (2024). What is code -switching? https://www.health.com/mind-
body/health-diversity-inclusion/code-switching.
01
the dominant culture, which, in this case, is Euro-American and perceived by
employees as Christian and male. As one survey respondent stated, "Continue to treat
everyone fairly and equitably as it has been doing. I think that if an organization tries
too hard, it creates the very barrier that it is attempting to eliminate." While this
viewpoint is open to many interpretations, we believe this staff member is expressing
their perspective that the City is overlooking the needs of the dominant organizational
culture (Euro-American and male) and instead prioritizing the perspective of employees
who align with other affinity groups and identities.
These findings indicate that the City may gain greater acceptance of DEIA initiatives by
shifting resources and effort toward those variables that focus on enhancing team
building, particularly within the context of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and access.
Another way of looking at this is that current levels of DEIA acceptance related to work
values suggest that a barrier to inclusion exists regarding diverse team collaboration at
a rate that is less than optimal. At the same time, because pride in work completion
and delivery is high. Therefore, strategies that build from the foundation of high value
in work product, combined with skill -building related to benefits of diverse team
collaboration, may improve overall results in both areas.
Finding 1: Values and Behaviors of Being Proactive, Showing
Initiative, and Personal Responsibility are Important to
Employees, But May Stifle Creativity and Innovation
RECOMMENDATION 1: Retain and sustain the work value taking accountability for
their own work and continuing to support employees using initiative, particularly
around problem solving. The City may want to consider developing incentives for
employees, such as reward or award processes that emphasize positive outcomes
and/or proactive problem resolution through team participation and collaboration.
RECOMMENDATION 2: Increase organizational capacity for creating and sustaining
teams that value diverse experiences, perspectives, and thought. Processes to consider
may include cross -training and the development of multi -disciplinary teams to resolve
high level problems and challenges. An example might be collaboration between
public work teams and the police department to resolve traffic enforcement at
intersections with high accident rates.
E
ACCOUNTABILITY
Accountability is one of the most difficult things to assess in the public realm.
Everybody wants it, but there's wide variance and disagreement about what it is and
how to measure it. In some cases, employees perceive that accountability has been
achieved when punitive actions are taken, which causes a tendency to view
accountability as a negative aspect of work life rather than as a strategy to create a
path toward responsibility and respect.
The topic of accountability came up with relative frequency during focus group
discussions. In response, we took a closer look at accountability as a sub -construct of
work values. We examined four categories: (1) employee accountability for
inappropriate behaviors, (2) City accountability for providing a fair and equitable
environment that values diversity of perspectives, perceptions of personal
accountability, (3) employee personal accountability for supporting a fair, respectful
work environment, and (4) the value that the City places on holding employees
accountable for their own work. For purposes of this assessment, we limited our
working definition of accountability to recognizing that accountability may be both
formal and informal, and for purposes of work values as experienced by employees,
accountability refers to individual accountability rather than organizational
accountability. The latter is discussed in more detail in the next section on trust.
Across all four measures of accountability, the mean, on a scale of 1 to 5, were at least
slightly above neutral. When asked about personal responsibility for supporting a fair
environment where different perspectives and values are respected, nearly all (89.7
percent) of staff who answered this question agreed or strongly agreed that they
believe they are personally accountable for sustaining a fair environment.
Table 3: Employee Perceptions of Accountability (n = 116, expressed as percent)
Agree Neutral Disagree
Employees are held accountable when
47.4 26.7 25.9
inappropriate behavior occurs
The City holds itself accountable for providing a fair
environment where different perspectives are 50.0 31.9 18.1
valued
I believe I am personally responsible for supporting
a fair environment where different perspectives are 89.7 8.6 1.7
valued and people are respected.
The City values employees taking accountability for 69.8 16.4 13.8
their work.
20
These results generally support the larger theme of employees feeling they are
responsible (and thereby accountable) for their own work. This reinforces the
information employees shared with us in interviews and focus groups that the tie that
binds organizational culture in Ashland government is pride in work, service to the
community, and a genuine interest in ensuring that all employees are treated
respectfully. However, there's also a theme that suggests while employees hold
themselves accountable for behaviors that support an inclusive workplace, they are less
likely to perceive the City as holding itself accountable for building and sustaining the
same environment.
Individual Accountability for Inappropriate Behavior
"Traditionally, it has been left up to
direct supervisors to address issues with
staff or among and between staff, but
sometimes supervisors aren't good at
addressing conflict, have favorites, or
just don't care to follow up, so nothing
gets done. This sets a bad precedent
for behavioral norms and it is frustrating
to go through proper channels to
address issues, then get no response".
- Survey Participant
A significant proportion of
employees (about 26 percent of
survey participants) perceive the City
is lacking in terms of holding people
accountable when inappropriate
behavior occurs. We also heard
employees state that when
inappropriate behavior occurs by an
individual, there's a tendency for the
City to either take a blanket
approach or avoid the problem
entirely rather than engaging in an
individual interaction between the
employee and their supervisor or
leadership. As a result, some
employees perceive they are punished or admonished for behavior in which they did
not engage. At the same time, the person responsible for the behavior didn't receive
individual guidance on how to improve performance nor were they held accountable
for their specific behavior.
Supervisors may be hesitant to have direct conversations with staff members who
engage in harmful or non -inclusive behaviors for a variety of reasons. One reason is
that supervisors may lack the training and support to feel confident about approaching
staff members with behavioral performance advice or guidance. However, when
leaders move toward discomfort, rather than away from it, they improve organizational
21
culture and communication between staff and supervisors." These actions may also
lead to quicker problem resolution by creating a mechanism to take a holistic view of
processes that may diagnose problems at an early stage. Encouraging staff to speak
up when they see things going wrong also opens a two-way communication channel
with supervisors that supports innovative problem solving and intervention strategies.
Through interviews, focus groups, and discussions with staff, we found that work and
behavioral expectations are not always clear. In part, this lack of clarity occurs because
the City has not consistently conducted annual performance reviews. Some
Departments use performance evaluations on an annual basis while others do not.
Some employees reported that they have experienced a performance evaluation a
couple of times during their service for the City, if at all. It wasn't clear whether a
consistent template or format was used for evaluations.
Performance evaluations, as a process, have pros and cons. On the more negative
side, they can be idiosyncratic and biased toward the favor of the evaluator, rather than
the employee. Tying performance evaluations to pay -for -performance models can also
be challenging, particularly when governments experience revenue shortfalls or other
unanticipated large expenditures such as experienced during the Covid 19 Pandemic.
Performance evaluation processes that are not clear, open to interpretation and/or bias
or are not well developed can create more harm than benefit. This negative potential
is particularly strong when employees perceive that they are not valued for their
contributions. At their worst, even among organizations that have eliminated formal
performance evaluations, performance assessment and management may still occur,
but it tends to be in the form of a "black box" that is hidden from employees.12
11 Kahn, W. (2003). The revelation of organizational trauma. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,
39 (4). 364-380.
Modeste, R., & Nelson, J. (2023). Creative Suffering for BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color)
Professionals Experiencing Organizational Trauma: A Conceptual Framework. Organization
Development Review, 55(4).
https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1 &sid=01 56763f-2534-4792-acfd-
09824812128c%40redis
12 L. Goler, J Gale, and A. Grant (2016). Let's not kill performance evaluations yet. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2016/11/lets-not-kill-performance-evaluations-
yet#:—:text=People%20want%20to%20know%20where recognize%20and%20reward%20top%20perfor
mance.
22
On the more positive side, performance evaluations can set expectations and improve
transparency for employees. Encouraging employees to engage in the evaluation
process, creates opportunity to showcase the value of their contributions. Performance
evaluation processes that include quarterly or monthly 1-on-1 conversations between
staff and supervisors also encourages meaningful conversations about challenges,
goals, improvements, and successes as they happen. In this way, innovation and
creativity is rewarded and there's an opportunity to collaborate on solutions to
challenges before the annual performance evaluation process.
Because annual performance reviews have been sporadic throughout the City, leaders
have a unique opportunity to collaborate with supervisors and employees to design
new evaluations that are affirming and supportive. Innovative performance evaluations
that demonstrate appreciation and respect for employees can promote and sustain a
positive organizational culture change for Ashland.
Finding 2: Employees feel accountable for producing good
work, but don't perceive the City holding itself accountable for
sustaining a fair work environment.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Retain the work values associated with individual
accountability for work product and fairness. Consider adding a performance factor to
the annual evaluation process that focuses on assessing the degree to which individual
contributors support a fair environment that values different perspectives.
RECOMMENDATION 4: Provide coaching and resources to managers and
supervisors related to conflict management and engaging in difficult conversations with
staff related to conduct and behavioral violations of conditions of employment at early
stages to support open and clear two-way communication channels about challenges,
opportunities, and behaviors associated with work product.
RECOMMENDATION 5: Consider processes and support to supervisors to
strengthen their ability to address behavioral missteps of staff in a timely manner. The
City may consider strengthening performance evaluation processes to encourage
supervisors to comment on communication and behaviors, both positive and negative,
as a mechanism to encourage respectful engagement with each other and the
community as well as to support a cultural norm of positive intent in communication.
23
RECOMMENDATION 6: Develop skill building and guidance for supervisors to
recognize disrespectful behaviors of people that report to them early and offer
interventions and meaningful coaching to address behavioral missteps in the spirit of
coaching and support instead of a more punitive approach to teambuilding.
RECOMMENDATION 7: Engage with staff through focus groups and small group
discussions to re -design and execute an annual performance evaluation process that is
perceived by employees to be fair, transparent, and captures values and contributions
of staff on an annual basis.
Connection Between Personal Accountability and Work Product
Most employees at the City of Ashland feel close connections with colleagues, even
across different departments and teams. One of the greatest strengths of the City is
the sense of interconnectedness and genuine admiration employees have for each
other. However, some employees view personal accountability as principally related to
work product. They may not see the connection between behaviors that create
pockets of "otherness" between themselves and co-workers. Conversations and work -
related encounters that challenge employees to consider multiple perspectives and
experiences are often met with frustration As one employee stated, "DEIA is a very
overblown topic. Diversity is great, forced diversity is not. It's simple. Be kind, hire
the best person, and it doesn't matter their background".
We believe City employees when they tell us that they do not perceive themselves to
be racist, sexist, ageist, or any other form of "ist". At the same time, we also came to
understand that many employees view DEIA as being principally focused racial and
ethnic identities with other dimensions of diversity as being secondary or non-existent,
including the experiences of women and people with non -binary gender identities. For
many City employees, the expectation when it comes to "doing the work" is to put
your head down, do your job, and don't tread into territory that may highlight
differences between people. There seems to be the false assumption that if
employees don't talk about or recognize any elements of diversity, equity simply
means that everyone is treated the same, regardless of outcome or impact.
Challenges for the City associated with personal accountability are more oriented
toward conduct and behaviors than work product. A common comment during focus
groups, interviews, and as represented in open ended questions in the survey was
"This doesn't have anything to do with me" and "I don't think this is an area the City
should spend resources". This type of response may be another indicator that some
24
employees are in early stages of DEIA development and haven't internalized the
connections between accountability, workplace culture, performance, and DEIA.
Employees who are moving toward having more candid conversations about DEIA are
still cautious about open and public discussions. In some cases, the segment of
employees who feel that there's too much of a focus on DEIA also voiced work -related
concerns tied to issues of diversity, inclusion, and equity. However, these employees
didn't necessarily recognize the connection between the two. As an example, during
one follow-on interview, a female employee noted that she objects to the position of
the city that "crams DEI down our throats", but later described a situation where she
was the subject of gender -based microaggressions at work. Employees throughout the
City may have adopted a defense mechanism that aligns them with what they perceive
as being the dominant culture as a safety protocol to avoid highlighting differences in
experience and perception. In other words, it is a lot easier to be seen and act as part
of the "in-group" even when some individual employees experience negative
consequences.
Generally, employees are largely comfortable with being accountable for things that
they perceive as being connected to work product. Some staff, however, lose interest
in understanding the relationship between productivity and inclusive engagement with
coworkers and colleagues. In terms of organizational culture as experienced by
employees, the default setting for inclusion is "treat everyone the same and with
respect." Many employees are open to learning and discussing issues related to DEIA,
but only if they perceive those discussions as:
1. Mission critical in terms of work product;
2. Only peripherally focused on DEIA matters;
3. Avoiding acknowledgment of differences between people;
4. Individualized and private when they raise personal concerns.
Consequently, employees feel trapped in a social system and network where they can't
engage in the development of relationships, groups, and affinities that challenge what
they perceive to be the dominant workplace culture.13 This behavior also maintains the
current and standard pattern which, for many employees, is frustrating but they feel
powerless to change it, even when they see or experience behaviors that are
detrimental to their professional or organizational success.
13 Ibid.
25
Finding 3: Some employees view DEIA as a low priority that
negatively impacts accountability and work productivity.
RECOMMENDATION 8: Develop strategies to encourage employees to explore the
connections between work productivity, accountability, and DEIA in ways that are
private and personalized, and allow them to see the organizational value of DEI in ways
they can personalize and use at work.
MICROAGGRESSIONS AND GENDER
A "microaggression"14 is a term used to describe slight verbal or small behavioral
differences that can be interpreted as discriminatory. These behaviors can be
intentional or unintentional. Focus groups, individual interviews, and open-ended
survey questions revealed daily microaggressions that respondents either initiated
themselves (not recognizing that they were expressing a microaggression) or the
behavior was directed toward them. Focus group sessions revealed a series of
microaggressions across multiple dimensions of diversity including race, gender, age,
and disability. However, the most common descriptions of microaggressions we
encountered were those directed toward women and to a lesser extent, members of
the LGBTQIA+ community. Consequently, the result is the informal creation of an
"other bucket" of employees who do not identify with male at birth. In other words,
for many employees, there are 2 categories of people: those who were born and
identify as male, and everyone else.
As a result, some employees feel marginalized, experience feelings of "otherness" at
work, and may be more susceptible to continual tension between supporting people at
work with different genders and gender identities. One employee shared, "Sometimes
I think the culture in my department, because there are so few women, we don't
understand the needs and potential benefits different gender perspectives can bring.
14 Ding, F., Lu, J., & Riccucci, N. M. (2021). How bureaucratic representation affects public organizational
performance: A meta -analysis. Public Administration Review, 81(6), 1003-1018.
https://doi.org/l0.1111 /puar.13361
26
In other cases, focus group data and responses to open ended questions on the survey
revealed that women are perceived as being treated differently, and as one person put
it, "not in a respectful or equitable way". Some women
shared that they have been "being talked down to" "I get talked to like I'm a
based on age and gender. At the same time, we heard kid, despite being very
critical feedback from employees who raised concerns intelligent and qualified for
about favoritism toward women in higher level City my position".
administration positions, including director level
positions. Some employees perceive that morale has -Survey Participant
been negatively impacted because of a variety of
internal appointments or promotions. Some employees
have the perception that there was little to no effort to seek outside candidates, and
there was little to no notification of an open position that would allow internal
candidates the opportunity to compete for a higher -level position.
As a matter of due diligence in our assessment, we followed up with Human Resources
and City leadership on this claim. The City reported that while advance notice of open
positions was given, few, if any, internal candidates applied. Nonetheless, for people
who are experiencing a sense of organizational distrust, their perception is their reality.
Ironically, there's a double-edged sword in Ashland. First
there's a perception that employees who identify as
"As a person who female are subject to microaggressions throughout the
presents as a woman, I organization. Second, there's a perception of favoritism
often feel like I have to in appointing women to higher level positions in City
"earn" respect to be government in a way that excludes other qualified
heard or simply present candidates.
when men have it
automatically".
-Survey Participant
27
To better understand the prevalence and source of microaggressions, a series of
questions was included in the survey instrument with the purpose of establishing a
baseline measurement of microaggressions and gain
insight on prevalence. Findings indicate that
employees are more likely to experience or observe
microaggressions perceived as discriminatory against
gender and race with greater frequency than other
diverse populations, though incidence of
microaggressions are relatively infrequent overall.
However, for those employees who experience the
sting of a microaggression they perceive to be aimed
at them, frequency is irrelevant.
"Create a safe reporting
process for incidents and
microaggressions. These
often go unreported, or if
they are reported, they are
easily dismissed".
-Survey Participant
Table 4: Employee Perceptions of Microaggressions (n = 109, expressed as
percent)
I have experienced or observed
Every
Every
A Few
Almost
Never
comments or actions I perceive
Week
Month
Times a
Never
as discriminatory against...
Year
Women.
1.9
7.4
13.0
37.0
40.7
People based on race or ethnicity.
1.9
0.9
8.3
31.5
57.4
People based on age.
0.9
2.8
10.1
34.9
51.4
People based on gender identity.
0.00
3.7
13.8
27.5
55.1
People with physical disabilities.
0.00
0.9
2.8
25.7
70.6
People with mental health
0.9
2.7
7.3
33.9
55.1
challenges.
In a perfect world, microaggressions would never occur across all categories we tested,
but this is an unrealistic expectation for any organization. In Ashland, the types of
microaggression that present challenges are related primarily, but not exclusively, to
women and gender identity. But every type of microaggression we tested resulted in
people experiencing or observing instances at least every month. Nearly a quarter of
survey participants (22 percent) reported experiencing or observing microaggressions
directed toward women at least a few times a year. Over 17 percent of participants
also reported experiencing or observing microaggressions directed to people based
on gender identity a few times a year or more frequently.
Finding 4: Microaggressions throughout the City tend to be
aimed toward people who identify as female.
RECOMMENDATION 9: Develop planned and strategic pathways to provide
learning to City employees about gender and gender -identity diversity that helps
employees identify stereotypes while supporting inclusive behavior.
RECOMMENDATION 10: Develop mechanisms to support a work environment
where people can be confident and feel psychologically safe about gender, gender
identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation and expression on their terms,
mitigates risk exposure, and supports a healthy workplace.
RECOMMENDATION 1 1: Develop an operational policy related to behavioral
expectations related to conduct and microaggressions that defines and prohibits
micro -aggressive behaviors of all types. Distribute information about reporting
mechanisms and graduated sanctions and penalties. Additionally, create performance
metrics aimed at reducing prevalence of microaggressions across all groups.
29
PART 2: ORGANIZATIONAL TRUST
Fully 50 percent of employees agree or strongly agree that the City holds itself
accountable for providing a fair environment that values different perspectives and
experiences. At the same time, over a quarter of employees have a very different
experience and feel the City fails in this respect. While trust is connected to
accountability as discussed in the previous section, it also could be considered the
most important element of organizational culture. Trust, respect, and inclusion are
interconnected and can be looked at in multiple ways including the degree of trust
employees have with their supervisors, leadership, and with each other. Trust is also an
important aspect of DEIA, as it is difficult to engage in an inclusive workplace where
there is a trust deficit.
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS ASSOCIATED WITH ORGANIZATIONAL
ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRUST
Organizational Accountability: informal and formal mechanisms by which the
organization and its leadership are held to task for what they commit to (Zheng, 2023).
Representative Bureaucracy: The theoretical argument that public organizations tend tc
value diversity for its potential contribution to the organizations' responsiveness to diverse
needs in the general population it serves (Ding & Riccucci, 2021).
Belongingness: The belief that employees are accepted by others with whom they share
similarities and the belief they are validated in their work -related beliefs and behaviors
(Ashikali, Groeneveld, & Kuipers, 2021). A sense of belonging means that employees
perceive that they are accepted, validated, and in the right place and the right time in
terms of professional development.
Diversity Management: Organizational cognizance of the demographic composition of
the workforce that promotes inclusion of workers from various backgrounds, experiences,
and cultures.
Uniqueness: The perception by employees that they seek and acquire individuality in
comparison with others (Ashikali, Groeneveld, & Kuipers, 2021).
Inclusion: The balance of needs of employees related to belongingness and uniqueness.
In other words, inclusion is achieved when employees experience a sense of belonging
that they belong to the group and are treated like an insider while retaining the
opportunity to sustain and express unique identities.
Trust: The belief in the abilities, integrity, and character of another person or entity, such
as a government.
High Trust Organization: An organization where employees feel safe to take risks, express
themselves freely, and innovate.
TRUST BETWEEN EMPLOYEES AND THE CITY
The definition we use to conceptualize organizational accountability refers to informal
and formal mechanisms by which the organization and its leadership are held to task
for what they commit to employees, the community, and elected leaders.15 In this
sense, we're purposefully differentiating between personal accountability as discussed
in the previous section and organizational accountability and trust.
During focus group sessions, a common theme of discussion focused on what is best
described as organizational trauma16 that originated at higher levels of city government
including executive level positions (directors and higher) and turmoil that was
generated by elected leadership several months ago and is tied to a previous
configuration of City Council and other elected officials. The current City Council
membership is different from previous years to include a new Mayor and slate of
elected officials, is now in place. However, many staff experienced trauma stemming
from the conflict between the previous City Council and City Government that has not
yet been fully resolved. Symptoms of trauma for employees include fear of job
stability, the perception that City employees are undervalued by the elected leaders
and City executives, and as one employee stated, "you shouldn't have to be at a
certain paygrade to be valued and heard". Some staff expressed concerns over mental
health related to past conflict with the previous City Council.
Apart from the conflict between elected leadership and City government, employees
also shared that they perceive a deterioration of trust related to fairness and equity in
Human Resources (HR) processes and issues with communication and transparency. It
should be noted that with new leadership in the HR Director role, past discrepancies
are being steadily resolved and the City is on the path to earning back the trust of
employees. Examples of trust building includes recognition of volunteer efforts that
support City goals, regular communications between HR and other city Departments,
and incremental but steady improvements in HR policies and processes.
TRUST BETWEEN EMPLOYEES AND DIRECT SUPERVISORS
15 Lily Zheng (2023). DEI Deconstructed: Your No -Nonsense Guide to Doing the Work and Doing it
Right. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Oakland, CA. p. 241.
16 Vimala Venugopal (2016). Understanding organizational trauma: A background review of
types and causes. Journal of Business and Management. 18 (10) pp.
https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jbm/papers/Vo118-issue 10/Version-7/11810076569.pdf.
31
In all focus group sessions, employees expressed their belief that their direct supervisor
or City leadership were, in their view, supportive of DEIA initiatives and professional
development. In nearly all cases, participants responded to this question in the
affirmative. It was clear to us that employees see the value the City places on DEIA,
but at the same time staffing shortages means most employees are largely focused on
getting through the day as efficiently as possible, and DEIA is a lesser priority. In other
words, staff are primarily, if not exclusively, focused on moving as efficiently as possible
through task completion. Consequently, there may be missed opportunities to
leverage organizational efficiency and effectiveness by organizing diverse and multi-
disciplinary work teams. There's already a good foundation of mutual respect among
employees across the organization. Organizations that approach work by looking at
diversity and productivity at the same time tend to be more creative, innovative,
solution oriented, and productive."
Paradigm also learned that communication between line -level employees, supervisors,
and department leadership is, in some cases, weak regarding a variety of operational
challenges, including support of DEIA initiatives and activities. This may be attributed
to inconsistent communication from top-level leadership but may also be an indication
that focused work on DEIA is not a priority for supervisors in how they lead and
manage teams. As a result, individual contributors are not provided with guidance or
positive reinforcement on respectful communication, allyship, or using empathy as a
skill that supports work performance.
In the survey, we examined 4 specific areas of organizational trust. First, we asked
employees to rate, on a scale of less than 1 to 5, where 5 indicated strong agreement,
the degree to which they perceive they are trusted by the City. Data for this question
were collected using a sliding scale, which made it possible for respondents to record a
score of 0 to less than 1. Then we looked at specific circumstances including trust
between coworkers, trust with direct supervisors or team leads, and trust with City
leadership using the same scale. It should be noted that in the case of trust in
leadership, some respondents recorded a score of less than 1 which was combined
with the "strongly disagreed" to construct comparative analysis.
17 Houston, L, Kraimer, M., & Schilpzand, P. (2023). The motivation to be inclusive. Understanding
how diversity self -efficacy impacts leader effectiveness in racially diverse workgroups. Group
and Organizational Management. 0 0:0 (preprint edition, retrieved from Sage Journals).
32
Table 4: Employee Perceptions of Trust (n = 116)
Mean
Median
Standard
Score
Score
Deviation
I feel trusted as an employee
3.95
4
1.14
1 trust my colleagues and coworkers
3.62
4
1.12
Trust Supervisors
4.23
5
1.15
Trust Leadership
2.90
3
1.43
Most employees strongly agree or agree that they feel they are personally trusted as
employees (72.4 percent of respondents) and they trust their colleagues and coworkers
(58.6 percent). Nearly 60 percent of employees strongly agreed that they trust their
supervisors (a trend that was noticed in other areas of the survey). However, the survey
findings are not aligned with qualitative data findings that were more critical of the
relationship between staff and their direct supervisor. There are 2 reasons this may
have occurred:
Employees who participated in the survey did not feel fully confident that the
survey was anonymous and there was some hesitation to report or disclose
information that is critical of direct supervisors for fear information attributable to
an individual employee may be reported.
2. From the employee perspective, the line between their direct supervisor and
higher -level leadership within the City is blurred. For a lot of people, leadership
could very possibly mean someone whose job title is higher on the
organizational hierarchy than their own.
Direct supervisors hold a pivotal role in establishing and sustaining a culture of
inclusion, equity, and valuing diversity in the City. First,
"Supervisors who feel employees will take their cue from the leader they have
that DEI is not an most direct contact with. For most positions, this is the
important goal to work direct supervisor, even in those cases where the direct
toward often hinder supervisor is a department head. When supervisors do not
the progress overall". see the value of DEIA in terms of performance or work
product, this viewpoint is implicitly or explicitly passed to
-Survey Participant employees. Even if employees hold different values than
33
their team leads, they're likely to engage in behavior that reflects the behavior and
preferences of the team lead.
Diversity management, alone, does not improve workplace performance's, and
mirroring the demographic diversity of the Ashland community within the City of
Ashland workforce will not, on its own, alleviate challenges related to diversity and
inclusion the City currently faces. Some focus group participants and survey
respondents noted that DEIA acceptance was a greater issue in the past, and they see
improvements to the willingness of coworkers to accept people with different
experiences and ideas, though there remains work to be done in this respect,
particularly around gender inclusion. However, team leadership approaches that
consider views and perspectives of staff19 combined with engaging employees in
decision making about operational improvements or changes that may impact how
employees engage in their jobs does make a difference, therefore improving
workplace inclusion.
Employees shared with Paradigm their experiences with direct supervisors that
suggests in general:
Immediate supervisors see the value in DEIA initiatives, but the current workload
prohibits proactive DEIA engagement.
Work teams rarely discuss the connection between DEIA and team performance.
Supervisors do not engage in strategies to strengthen inclusion as part of
teamwork.
For these reasons, it is important to gather and capitalize on the support of DEIA
initiatives from line level supervisors and emphasize that DEIA is not an "add -on"
activity. To fully include DEIA as part of organizational culture, it is essential that it is
not viewed as a desired, but unnecessary "side -dish". Lacking this work value, follow-
through by employees on performance and accountability measures connected to
DEIA will be challenging. In other words, if immediate supervisors do not buy -into and
practice inclusive leadership strategies, it is difficult to reinforce expected behaviors of
employees and the City will likely experience challenges in meeting DEIA goals and
objectives.
18 Sabharwal, M. (2014). Is diversity management sufficient? Organizational inclusion to further
performance. Public Personnel Management 43(2) 197-217.
19 Ibid.
34
Finding 5: Strengthening and supporting leadership skills,
including conflict management, is needed to resolve team
building by direct supervisors.
RECOMMENDATION 12: Enhance support and professional development to
immediate supervisors about strategies to leverage inclusion that encourages
individual employees to contribute to team problem solving and resolution, identify
and achieve team -based performance goals, and personalize value of DEIA in
achieving career progression and performance.
RECOMMENDATION 13: The City should consider identifying ways to incentivize
Directors and employees with supervisory responsibilities to identify a professional
development goal of:
1. Participating in a training opportunity or workshop associated with improving
communication skills, DEIA, or team problem solving,
OR
2. Setting a measurable performance goal that demonstrates team collaboration
and communication that utilizes strategies associated with inclusive leadership
to solve a particular challenge or improve service delivery.
Communication Deficits
Some employees noted that inconsistent communication from leadership to
supervisors to employees erodes trust. This speaks to transparency as an element of
accountability and employees perceive the
issue to be largely located at the City "My biggest issue is the lack of
executive level. Employees feel that communication when changes are
information related to how individual made that impact people who are
contributors go about their work is not always hands on within the job. I do not
communicated to directors. This means that feel that employees are included or
directors are limited in their capacity to pass considered when decisions are
critical communication to supervisors and made that impact how work is
employees. done."
-Focus Group Participant
35
Staff shared with us their perceptions that communication is inconsistent, may not
occur in a timely way, and lacks transparency. In most focus groups, we heard from
people who expressed frustration with the communication channels in general, but
particularly from Human Resources (HR). It should, however, be noted that at the time
Paradigm was collecting data about organizational culture, the City was in the midst of
a significant leadership change in the Department of Human Resources. Since data
were collected in December 2023, the Human Resources director has made efforts to
connect with Departments on a regular basis and has implemented processes that we
characterize as "people first, human centered". While it is not possible to ascertain the
impact of these efforts at this point, we recognize the value and believe that the work
the Department of Human Resources is doing to improve transparency and
communication will result in improvements to organizational culture.
Employees perceive that opportunities for hiring or promotion are not clearly
communicated, if at all. Employees reported that they lack the basic resources from
HR to do their job well, including information about the structure and job roles of other
employees and guidance on performance expectations and evaluations. The City
recognizes that in the relative recent past, this may have been the case because the HR
director role was vacant for an extended period of time. Since a new leader has taken
the helm, there have been significant improvements to communication including a
more active effort by the HR department to communicate with staff across various
means and media, scheduled visits by HR to Departments for discussions and
information on HR topics, efforts to acknowledge and appreciate efforts by staff to
advance organizational goals, and creating space and time for employees to engage
with one another in social settings to build relationships.
Employees across the city have felt the impacts of a long vacancy in the HR Director
role. Early in the assessment process we learned about concerns from some staff that
they do not have access to an Employee Guidebook document that consolidates and
clarifies the operational policies, behavioral, and performance expectations of
employees. Staff also raised concerns that they couldn't find resources, connect with
co-workers, or anticipate a timely performance review. Though new employees receive
a "new hire packet" that includes information about HR policies and expectations, this
information may not be up-to-date and fully accurate.
Many employees, however, do not recall receiving such a document, and from what we
were able to ascertain, there is no formal policy guidance that supports the full
workforce, regardless of whether individual contributors are part of a collective
bargaining agreement. This also means that the conditions of employment,
36
expectations, and performance evaluation procedures are vague or non-existent. This
chips away at transparency and trust between employees and the City. Directors and
City management believe they are doing their part in communicating important policy
or operational changes with the expectation that a downstream cascade of information
from the City Manager and/or directors to individual immediate supervisors who then
share information with employees.
In all fairness, the Human Resources Department has been operating without a fulltime
director for several months. The current HR Director is working to resolve some of the
issues with lack of policy structure and transparency, but from the employee
perspective, change cannot happen fast enough. We are also aware that the City has
struggled to recruit external candidates to apply for open leadership positions. As
some employees explained to us, in part this happened because the City Uxperienced
some reputational damage among professionals and employees in other municipalities
in the region largely as a result of the previous City Council's activities and public
criticism of Ashland staff. That said, there is a new Council now, new and emerging
leadership in the City, and people who do the work of the people with a willingness to
learn, work hard, and support an inclusive government. Despite what may have
happened in the past, this new vision is the Ashland of the future.
In addition to staying the course to resolve the challenges of the past several months,
the Paradigm Team found that there are few mechanisms that support an upstream
communication flow from individual contributors to higher level leadership within City
government. The result of this is that employees do not always feel heard by City
leadership or valued, and City leadership does not gain the benefit of decision making
and problem resolution that considers multiple perspectives and experiences.
Furthermore, when the communication flow stops at the immediate supervisor level,
bridging the communication gap between high-level leadership and employees is
difficult.
Finding 6: Communication deficits erode trust which weakens
trust between employees, supervisors, and City leadership.
RECOMMENDATION 14: City leadership and immediate supervisors should
collaborate with each other about identifying where communication gaps may be
occurring, then construct a communication strategy to ensure critical information flows
downstream to staff in a clear and timely way. This communication strategy may
37
include touchpoints within the communication flow that requires signature (e.g.,
director, supervisor, employee) for mission critical communications.
RECOMMENDATION 15: Consider the development of establishing two-way
communication mechanisms for staff to engage directly with directors and City
leadership. Options may include exploring technologies that allow for anonymous
reporting (e.g., fraud and abuse reporting technology), and greater opportunities for
direct communication between employees, directors, and city executive leadership.
RECOMMENDATION 16: Update and develop a comprehensive Employee Handbook
that includes all current policies and regulations that pertain to employee experience
throughout the full employment life cycle from recruitment and selection to retirement,
including succession planning. Update this book at least biannually, and consider
distributing through multiple formats (e.g., web -based, paper, or optimized for tablets
and remote devices).
TRUST BETWEEN EMPLOYEES AND THE LEADERSHIP TEAM
Survey results indicated the percentage of employees who agree or strongly agree that
they trust leadership (that is the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, and Directors)
holds at approximately one-third (33.9 percent) of survey participants who responded
to this question. Alternatively, slightly over 20 percent (20.9%) of employees
participating in the survey responded to the question in what could be characterized as
"intensely disagreed" with a reported rating of 0 to 1 on a 5-point scale. Another 16.5
percent of people who answered this survey question noted disagreement with the
statement that they trust leadership. We are confident that, from the perspective of
staff, there is an organizational deficit of trust between individual contributors and
upper -level leadership.
Feedback regarding the survey from participants offered some insight about the
relationship between employees and leadership. In terms of the question that defined
leadership as the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, and Directors, some survey
participants noted that they believed this question should be disaggregated because
they have strong and trusting relationships with their Director, but not as much with the
executive leadership of the City. Furthermore, among focus group participants and
people who engaged in a 1-on-1 interview, we heard strong support for the Deputy
City manager (currently the Interim City Manager), though there was also criticism from
a minority of employees. We also noted that the size of the workforce is relatively
small in some departments, and therefore, the immediate supervisor for some
employees is their director. With these exceptions noted, combined with information
gleaned from individual interviews and focus group discussions, we believe the source
of organizational distrust primarily lies within the ranks of City executive leadership.
Perhaps more to the point, employees perceive that while the relationship between
City government and elected officials is improving, the crisis of trust caused by the
previous configuration of elected officials has some lingering impacts for employees
that have yet to be fully resolved. It is also worth noting that during our site visit, the
City Manager at the time vacated his position, which contributed to further unrest
among the employees which may have impacted later responses to the survey. As we
were in the middle of data collection when the City Manager resigned his position, it
wasn't clear if employees were voicing concerns about the departing City Manager or
current executive leadership.
Members of the Leadership Team, including City executives and directors, have
important roles in capitalizing on support of DEIA initiatives from line -level supervisors.
Lacking this support, organizational development and follow-through on performance
and accountability measures connected to DEIA will be challenging in the future. We
recommend that for City Executives and Directors to rebuild and restore trust with
employees, the City should consider a strategy to move beyond diversity management
and toward inclusive leadership.
Key elements of this strategy may include:
1. City managers and directors move from a passive position (valuing diversity) to
an action -oriented approach focused on diversity management, which in turn,
eventually supports inclusive leadership strategies.
2. Strategies for inclusive management to consider may include:
a. Mentoring programs,
b. Succession planning,
c. Family -friendly programs,
d. Alternative work arrangements or work/life balance scheduling, when
possible, to maintain and support City operations with the caveat that not
all staff will be eligible for alternative work arrangements because of the
nature of their work,
39
e. Development of goals and accountability metrics and measurement that
connect to mid- and long-range inclusive goals for the City, and,
f. Improving recruitment, selection, and retention of staff throughout City
government by focusing on needs and expectations of new and
emerging generations of leaders and workers.
It is important to note that singular strategies need to be connected to an overall vision
on building sustainable processes of inclusion and performance throughout the City.
Policies such as mentoring and alternative work arrangements are important leadership
efforts, but they are not always successful if top-level organizational leadership do not
support them, or implementation is not followed through by immediate supervisors.20
When this happens, employees participating in these programs may experience
backlash or be viewed as being singled out by other employees. For the City of
Ashland, there is a particularly high risk of this occurring as many employees shared
concerns that there is a wide belief among employees that some people rose to
leadership roles by appointment rather than a competitive process open to other
internal and external candidates. In terms of planning, before engaging in inclusive
leadership strategies that are built from diversity management needs, we recommend
that top-level City leadership first engage in a meaningful leadership alignment
process that helps leaders gain insight about the value of DEIA and trust building
throughout the organization, how to measure it, and how to hold themselves and
others accountable.
Finding 7: City leadership should clarify and define goals,
objectives, and metrics with a focus on measurement and
planned incremental change for the future.
RECOMMENDATION 17: Engage in a leadership alignment process to identify
goals, objectives, and measures from the perspective of leaders that support building a
culture of inclusion and organizational belongingness at the City of Ashland. As an
example, this process may follow this structure, but elements and areas of focus should
be unique to City needs.
20 Sabharwal, M. (2014). Is diversity management sufficient? Organizational Inclusion to further
performance. Public Personnel Management, 43(2); 197-217.
Ell]
Leadership Values Alignment Model
RECOMMENDATION 18: Conduct a gap analysis and design a strategy to connect
employee perceptions of trust and accountability (see Recommendation 14) and results
from leadership alignment (Recommendation 17). Utilize this strategy as part of the
City's strategy for DEI sustainability.
DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT VERSUS INCLUSIVE LEADERSHIP
While there is evidence that staff do not always see the difference between diversity
management (that is attention to specific demographic affinity groups such as gender,
race, ethnicity, disability among others) and inclusion, the City itself has taken a close
look at the utility of diversity management. Based on our assessment of inclusion
throughout city government, we believe a shift of strategy that focuses more on
inclusion than diversity may alleviate some problems related to building trust
throughout Ashland government. We make this recommendation with 2 caveats:
1. As mentioned previously in this section, there is a significant lack of parity in
gender representation between the community of Ashland and City government
that needs to be addressed, including deterrence and management of gender -
based microaggressions.
41
2. As Part III will discuss in greater detail, there are important findings about
employee perceptions of comfort related to race and gender identity that may
require resolution apart from the overall recommended strategy of inclusion
management for leaders.
The Leadership Team of the City is primarily responsible for creating and sustaining
diverse, equitable departments and instilling and sustaining a culture that values
diversity and inclusion that connects to performance management of inclusive internal
policies that support valuing different perspectives, experiences, and ideas from a
variety of levels of staff throughout the City.
Finding 8: Shift attention toward strategies that focus on
inclusive leadership and away from diversity management.
RECOMMENDATION 19: In order to strengthen trust, the City Leadership Team
should move toward inclusion leadership with an emphasis on sustaining a productive
workplace where employees are encouraged to express their opinions, and input is
sought before important organizational decision making in a manner that supports
voice, perspective, and involvement of all employees, including those with different
perspectives including race, ethnicity, age, gender, gender identity, and disability as a
long-range goal and strategy rather than focusing on diversity management.
42
PART 3: ORGANIZATIONAL COMFORT,
WELCOMENESS, AND RESPECT
Organizational comfort, welcomeness, and accountability are interrelated concepts that
point toward creating a sustainable work environment where people are willingly and
actively engaged in their work in a way that supports, welcomes, and invites people
with different ideas, perspectives, and experiences to support problem resolution and
innovation. High levels of organizational comfort, welcomeness, respect, and
accountability are all markers of high-performance teams and work cultures where
people are inspired and engaged in their work.
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS ASSOCIATED WITH ORGANIZATIONAL
COMFORT, WELCOMENESS, AND RESPECT
Organizational Comfort: a work environment where people feel safe and
valued because of their experiences and perceptions, not despite them.
Organizational Welcomeness: the degree to which an organization's culture,
policies, and practices facilitate the integration of new employees into the
workplace and impact the organization's ability to retain new talent and
provide a supportive environment and opportunities for career progression.
Psychological Safety: The group level belief that employees can express
ideas, concerns, ask questions, and admit mistakes without fear of unjust
negative consequences. While the act of speaking up is an individual trait, it is
the group values and characteristics that creates and sustains organizational
safety.
Accountability: Willingly accepting responsibility for one's own actions and
accomplishing the things you set out to do at work that may include tasks,
projects, or the way employees interact with each other and the community.
Organizational Accountability: A type of accountability that is associated
with organizational goals and is not associated with punishment, retaliation, or
repercussions. Organizational accountability means setting a high bar for
performance that builds on positive morale, growth, and organizational
culture.
43
ORGANIZATIONAL COMFORT
The Paradigm Team collected survey data that described whether employees have
experienced discomfort based on various elements of diversity including age, race or
ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity, religion, socioeconomic status,
or dis/ability. For each of these characteristics we found that most people have not
experienced a sense of uncomfortableness based on the dimensions of diversity we
measured. Table 5 provides detailed information about each of these measures. In
some cases, respondents skipped this question entirely, which means that self-
selection bias may occur. In other words, data analysis is based only on the
participants who chose to answer these questions and may not reflect all survey
participants or the overall workforce.
Table 5: Employee Perceptions of Organizational Comfort (n = 109, expressed as a
percentage)
Highly
Comfortable
Neutral
Uncomfortable
Highly
Comfortable
Uncomfortable
Age
35.8
35.8
19.3
4.6
2.7
Race/Ethnicity
40.4
32.1
10.1
6.4
0.9
Sexual Orientation
40.4
33.9
11.9
0.0
2.7
Gender or Gender
37.6
31.2
14.7
6.4
4.9
Identity
Socioeconomic
37.6
37.6
14.7
2.7
1.8
Status
Dis/Ability
36.7
34.9
11.9
0.9
2.7
Religion
38.5
33.9
14.7
1.8
2.7
In terms of values and behaviors to retain, survey results indicate that most employees
expressed a degree of comfort related to sexual orientation (but not gender or gender
identity). In terms of opportunities to strengthen organizational comfort, we are calling
out gender and/or gender identity because it is the only category where more than 10
percent of participants noted an uncomfortable or highly uncomfortable climate. It is
also worth noting that in terms of race and ethnicity, nearly 7.5 percent of participants
noted discomfort.
In a deeper exploration of the data that looked at elements of diversity and responses
to each of these questions, we did not identify any notable trends in the data, though
44
in some cases, it did appear that when a respondent identified with an element of
diversity, that person was more likely to note a level of discomfort for the same.
However, it is important to note that the small number of people for some identity
groups means that there is a risk of identifying a participant or because of the small "n"
and the result was not statistically significant. Therefore, from an analytic perspective,
we cannot offer a statistically reliable comment on certain demographics among the
workforce and perceptions of discomfort. This limitation applies to:
• Nonwhite people on discomfort related to race or ethnicity.
• Nonbinary people or people who identify as non -cis -gender, that is people who
identify with a gender that is different than the one assigned at birth, on
discomfort related to gender or sexual orientation.
• People who experience a disability on discomfort related to disability.
With that said, survey results indicated in each of the cases noted above, people
experienced discomfort based on elements of diversity they identify with. We cannot
draw conclusions with statistical certainty that non -white people have experienced
discomfort based on race; non -binary or gender non -conforming people have
experienced discomfort based on gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation; or
people with disabilities have experienced discomfort related to disability. We did,
however, observe that in every one of these categories, one or more people identified
discomfort. This suggests to us that from an organizational culture perspective there is
not obvious or rampant discomfort for people who identify with any given element of
diversity, there are instances where some people among the workforce experience
discomfort based on real or perceived affiliation with an identity group.
It is important to note that we looked at race, ethnicity, gender orientation and gender
identity to determine the relationship between identity and perceptions of comfort
specifically an exploration of whether participants who are Black/African American are
more likely to experience discomfort related to race, whether gender nonconforming
employees are more likely to experience discomfort related to gender identity, and
whether women are more likely to experience discomfort around gender.
As mentioned in earlier portions of this report the "small n" of these subgroups
prevents us from reporting specific findings because of the risk of inadvertently
disclosing personally identifiable information about participants. However, when we
examined the overall average score for "The City of Ashland is a comfortable place to
be and work", the weighted average that considers only the number of people who
responded to the question, the score rises to 3.7. Nonetheless, for some employees,
45
the City is not a comfortable place to work, and this creates opportunity for
improvement.
Overall, about 140 employees participated in the survey, but only 104 (or about 74
percent) self -identified race and/or gender identity. This means that we do not have
demographic data related to race, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity for a quarter of
survey participants. We looked at this subgroup of participants as a separate
subsection of survey participants. In other words, we treated those who did not
identify race, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity as a stand-alone sub -group. The
result is that the mean score on the "overall comfort at work" subscale is 2.82. This
score is below neutral and in the territory of "uncomfortable to highly uncomfortable".
As a result, we are not able to say within the boundaries of statistical confidence that
failure to identify race, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity results in a statistically
significant difference from the overall group.
There is not a reliable way to estimate the number or percent of those who did not
report race, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity as fitting into a category of race,
ethnicity, gender, or gender identity without violating our promise of anonymity of this
survey. We interpreted this to mean that there were a good number of people, about
25 percent of participants, who felt they had something important to say about
organizational comfort but did not want to risk having their survey responses tied to
them personally. Simply stated, they did not want to provide too much information
they felt would personally identify them.
Many participants noted this in the open-ended
questions of the survey. For example, one open Qualitative and quantitative
ended question asked participants to tell us evidence suggests that
anything else they thought we should know about people who are gender-
DEI and belonging at the City and emphasized that nonconforming, LGBTQIA+, or
survey responses are anonymous. We found many identify as women are more
comments that simply stated, "I don't think this likely to experience
survey is anonymous" or suggested that there are organizational discomfort
nefarious purposes behind this assessment. We compared to other
also found that people who left comments like employees.
expressing skepticism about anonymity seemed to
be less likely to identify race, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity.
In the end, we concluded that given the totality of evidence and analytic methods that
included an assessment of qualitative data through focus groups, interviews, and
46
responses to open-ended survey questions combined with quantitative analysis that
included an examination of descriptive statistics, construction of a series of pivot
tables, and measures of central tendency, that people who identify as Black American
or non-Euro-American do not have a very different experience at work related to
comfort and inclusion than the dominant Euro-American, male culture. Though we
found no evidence in either the qualitative or quantitative data we analyzed does not
necessarily mean that discomfort doesn't exist. It may just mean that people didn't
self -report it to us. However, there is evidence to suggest that people who are gender -
nonconforming, LGBTQIA+21, or identify as women are somewhat more likely to
experience organizational discomfort compared to other employees.
We believe this phenomenon to be tied to organizational trust and trust of City
leadership given the relatively low sub -measures in these two areas. People who are
experiencing discomfort at work are hesitant to reach out or help or support at the risk
of identifying themselves. This means they are also unlikely to request accommodation
or remedy for which they may be entitled under law and public or operational policy.
The experiences of City employees who are not Euro-American are nuanced, shielded,
and are not openly expressed.
We did identify elements of trust and comfort that are improving. That employees are
willing to share their perceptions at all, is an indicator to us that trust is growing
throughout the City. We attribute this to two factors: First, while some employees
disagree with the selection process for staff in the Human Resources Department, there
are improvements in opportunities for employees to reach out when they need to, and
recent hiring and recruitment efforts have resulted in approximately 75 new hires since
the current Director of Human Resources took the lead. Second, City leadership, both
appointed and elected, have emphasized and prioritized DEI as an organizational
value, and in our experience with the City of Ashland, we see the proverbial needle
moving slowly but steadily in a positive direction. However, understanding the
experiences, needs, and perspectives of people with racial, ethnic, or gender related
differences from the primarily White and male culture is important in terms of
developing a wholly inclusive workforce.
21 LGBTQIA+ is an acronym that stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex,
Asexual, and gender non -conforming. It is worth noting that there is robust discussion in gender
identity groups about the appropriateness of creating an acronym that includes all non -
heterosexual identities as it fails to recognize the differences between experiences and
perceptions associated with gender and sexuality.
47
Finding 9: Impediments to a psychologically safe work
environment are connected to race, ethnicity, gender, and
gender identity.
RECOMMENDATION 20: Continue efforts to encourage respect and value the
differences among the workforce that includes developing strategies to create
opportunities for learning, sharing, and understanding that the strength that diversity
and inclusion has on the work experience and organizational trust.
RECOMMENDATION 21: Provide additional support to direct supervisors related to
recognizing and valuing differences among their team, including education on
recognizing the early signs of conflict and effective conflict management that supports
early identification and resolution.
RECOMMENDATION 22: Readminister the Culture and Belonging survey (minimally,
the construct of organizational comfort) no sooner than one year from the release of
this report to determine whether measurable change has occurred related to comfort
and trust.
ORGANIZATIONAL WELCOMENESS
Organizational welcomeness is slightly different from organizational comfort and refers
to the degree to which an organization's culture, policies, and practices facilitate the
integration of new employees into the workplace and impact the City's ability to retain
new talent. For the City of Ashland, this is particularly important because despite
recent success in onboarding approximately 75 employees, the City is experiencing
staffing shortages across most, if not all, Departments. Growth and development
throughout the Ashland community means additional employees will be needed in the
future to accommodate a growing community. Leveraging the element of
welcomeness is essential to recruiting a new generation of employees, many of whom
are looking to social media to make an assessment about organizational fit that for
many prospective employees means a look at commitment to diversity, equity, and
inclusion.
Many factors can influence organizational welcomeness, including culture, values,
norms, and expectations, degree of social support, and an overall sense of inclusion. A
welcoming organization creates a work environment that is characterized by trust,
respect, and openness. Welcomeness is a critical aspect of employee engagement
and retention because it significantly impacts an employee's sense of belonging,
commitment, and in the long run, job satisfaction. While there are many aspects of
organizational welcomeness, we focused on those most closely connected to diversity,
equity, inclusion, and access. Table 6 describes survey participant's perceptions
related to the connection between elements of diversity among the workforce and
organizational welcomeness.
Table 6: Employee Perceptions of Welcomeness (n = 109, expressed as a
percentage)
I believe the City of Ashland is a Welcoming
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Place Based on...
Race and/or ethnicity
73.2
14.8
8.4
People of all sexes
73.4
13.8
8.2
People of all gender identities
61.4
25.7
7.3
People regardless of age
78.9
12.8
5.5
People from different socioeconomic statuses
76.1
14.7
6.4
Disability (physical, learning, emotional,
69.8
22.0
5.5
psychological)
I believe DEI makes the City of Ashland a
67.0
15.6
13.7
better place to work.
Totals may not equal 100 because of rounding.
There are some notable differences in comparing welcomeness to organizational
comfort. First, in terms of welcomeness, race, sex, age, and socioeconomic status are
the dimensions of diversity where employees are more likely to feel a sense of
welcomeness as compared to sexual orientation and disability/ability as measures of
comfort. In making decisions about organizational welcomeness, it is important to
note that findings and recommendations related to race, gender, and gender identity
related to organizational comfort, also apply to organizational welcomeness, and likely
moderate the relationship some people who are Black, Latine', female, or gender non-
conforming. Similarly, though, gender identity is a dimension of diversity where
employees are less likely to feel comfortable or welcome. It is also significant that over
13 percent of employees who participated in the survey disagree or strongly disagree
with the notion that DEIA makes Ashland a better place to work, which creates
opportunities solidify DEIA as an important part of organizational culture in the City of
Ashland.
49
As part of our analysis, we also tested whether the perception that DEIA makes the City
of Ashland a better place to work impacted overall perceptions of welcomeness and
found that it did not have a statistically significant impact on welcomeness. In other
words, from the perspective of employees, DEIA initiatives, though perceived by new
employees, emerging leaders, and many others as having a positive impact on
organizational culture, does not statistically impact organizational welcomeness.
In terms of welcomeness, improvements may have a measurable impact on recruitment
and selection. Organizational socialization and outcomes for new employees are
strong factors in job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job performance.zz
Furthermore, a survey by Deloitte found that younger workers are more likely to
prioritize DEI when evaluating potential employers. For example, Deloitte's survey
found that among Millennial and Gen Z workers, over 75 percent said that an
organization's diversity, equity, and inclusion policies are important when deciding
where to work.23 The City's ability to retain new employees may be dependent upon a
work culture that sustains welcomeness and comfort, particularly as related to DEIA.
This may be particularly important as the City sees growth in recruitment pools of Gen
Z and Millennial job seekers. Nationally, nearly 70 percent of these generations
combined said a diverse and inclusive workplace is important to them, and over 55
percent reported turning down a job offer because they did not feel the organization
was sufficiently committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion.za
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported approximately 526,000 vacancies in state and
local government in October 2023, yet only 157,000 hires.25 In other words, across the
nation, there are about 1.5 government sector vacancies for every 1 applicant. Like we
heard from City of Ashland leaders, recent research suggests that about three-quarters
of public sector HR directors reported an insufficient number of qualified applicants for
open positions, which in turn leads to burnout for those who are sustaining
employment. New employees in government want a different set of benefits beyond
traditional compensation packages with pensions and good health insurance coverage.
22 Liang, J., Farh, C.I.C, & Farh, J.L. (2012) Psychological antecedents of promotive and
prohibitive voice. A two -wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71-92.
23 Deloitte. (2018) The millennial survey 2018. Retrieved from
https//www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/millennialsurvey.html.
24 McKinsey & Company (2021). Diversity wins: How inclusion matters. Retrieved from
https://www.mckinsey.com/.
25 Lavigna, B. (Dec. 2015). What job seekers want - and how government can deliver. Retrieved
from https://icma.org/blog-posts/what job -seekers -want -and -how -government -can -
deliver? zs=SxPSml & zl=xnpM9.
50
They seek flexibility, additional time off, and when possible, remote work options. For
Ashland to remain competitive and attract highly qualified candidates, rethinking
components of a full -compensation package may help attract and retain a qualified
and diverse slate of candidates for open positions.
Finding 10: Most employees perceive the City as welcoming, but
there are some barriers.
RECOMMENDATION 23: Develop a recruitment and retention strategy that
leverages the strengths of appealing to new employees through non -conventional
compensation packages. At the same time, develop strategies to strengthen
organizational commitment related to multiple elements of diversity that may improve
retention of employees and create avenues for diverse recruitment strategies including
greater use of advanced technologies and social media.
RESPECT and CLIMATE
The construct of respect focused on the degree to which employees feel respected,
perceive the City to support an organizationally comfortable place to work, and the
degree to which people feel they are treated fairly. Trust and respect are typically
highly correlated, but we see them as different measures. For example, one of the
elements we collected data about in this construct focused on the degree to which
employees respect their direct supervisor where one of the measures is that employees
can disagree without fear of retaliation. Combined, these measures speak to
psychological safety at work.
One way to think about the difference between trust and respect is that respect
encompasses feelings of high regard for someone. Respect also guides how
employees and staff ideally interact with one another in the work environment, and
therefore is reciprocal. Staff who respect their supervisors reasonably expect that
supervisors respect them. We think of respect as a sub -measure and cornerstone of
trust as discussed in Part II of this report. Employee perceptions of respect at work can
be better understood by a closer examination of the frequency of responses for each
individual element of respect.
51
Table 7: Employee Perceptions of Respect by percentage (n =109, expressed as a
percentage)
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
I feel respected at the City of Ashland
70.6
15.6
13.7
I feel comfortable with the climate related
68.8
20.2
11.0
to DEIA
I am able to disagree with my supervisor
73.1
11.1
15.8
without fear of retaliation
I respect my direct supervisor
87.8
5.6
6.5
1 respect City Leadership
58.4
23.2
18.6
1 feel my performance is fairly evaluated
58.3
24.1
17.6
While most employees feel respected (about 70 percent) about 13 percent do not.
The reasons for feeling (or not feeling) trusted are not known, but qualitative responses
provide some clues. One employee shared that "I fully trust my direct supervisor;
however, I have seen [another department leader] bully employees and nothing is
done about this".
A closer look at the elements of workplace respect revealed an interesting paradox.
Most employees feel respected, comfortable with the current DEIA climate (about 69
percent) and hold respect for supervisors including the sense they can disagree with
their supervisors without fear of retaliation (over 73 percent). While nearly three-
quarters of people who responded to this survey question agreed or strongly agreed
that they can disagree with their supervisor without fear of retaliation, many employees
(over 15 percent) have a very different experience with their supervisors. The sub -
measure of fear of retaliation is among the highest percentages of disagreement. In
other words, while most people perceive that they can disagree with their supervisor, a
significant number may fear retaliation. Nearly 20 percent of participants feel their
performance is unfairly evaluated. This occurrence provides some insight as to why
there may be a trust deficit overall from the perspective of employees.
This finding connects to narratives heard in focus groups. Some employees, notably
women and people who identify as female, presented accounts of their experiences
where they feel they were treated unfairly by supervisors or were adversely impacted
because of their sex or gender identity. Through conversations and interviews, we
learned that some employees view retaliation in much broader terms that may extend
beyond protected status to include actions such as team reassignment, being assigned
52
undesirable tasks, or even discussions about performance and performance
improvement.
The U. S. Department of Labor defines retaliation as a manager, supervisor, or
administrator fires an employee or takes other type of adverse action against an
employee for engaging in a protected activity, meaning that employees assert their
rights to be free from employment discrimination.26 Throughout our assessment, we
found no evidence of retaliation as defined by the US Department of Labor or the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Instead, we believe this may be an
indicator that while employees respect their supervisors and their ability to make
decisions about day-to-day work assignments, they don't always trust their supervisors
to make decisions that employees see as benefiting them directly.
Finding 11: Some employees fear retaliation by supervisors or
leadership, but not as defined by Federal or State labor laws.
RECOMMENDATION 24: We did not identify any incidents of retaliation as defined
by federal or state law through our assessment process. As such, we make no
recommendations related to legal retaliation, but view the perceptions of staff as
indicators of lower than ideal levels of trust in terms of decision making that benefits
employees directly. We refer to recommendations related to trust and team building in
Part II of this report for specific strategies.
TRUST AS AN INDICATOR OF ORGANIZATIONAL RESPECT
Survey results revealed that most employees (over 90 percent) respect their supervisor.
There's a similar comparison to the percentage of employees who trust their
supervisor, about 88 percent. We also heard from many employees about the great
level of trust they have in direct supervisors, more in some departments over others.
The level of trust between employees and direct supervisors is high, and there seems
to be a sense that employees generally feel that their supervisor is the person that
makes them feel safe, valued, and protected from external uncertainty or public
discourse.
26 For more information about EEOC facts and definitions of employment retaliation, see
https://www.eecc.gov/facts-about-retaliation.
53
Supervisors are held in high regard by staff, teams, and work crews. Furthermore,
supervisors are equally trusted by employees to make good decisions that are fair and
beneficial to them, though there were some exceptions as noted in the previous
section. The high convergence of trust and respect employees hold for their
supervisors creates an important opportunity for supervisors to lead the charge of
creating and sustaining a DEIA focused organizational culture. When staff members
work on a team that is led by someone who sees value in DEIA, building an
organizational culture of inclusion is accelerated. It also means that when supervisors
do not see the value in DEIA, they won't practice strategies associated with inclusion,
and their teams won't, either.
Supervisors are key to connecting employees with executive City leadership to build
and restore trust. They also can build other DEIA-focused relationships that may
include supporting respectful and empathetic communication with each other and the
community and gradually acknowledging the value of respecting perspectives and
experiences of diverse people throughout City of Ashland government.
Finding 12: High levels of trust and respect for supervisors
throughout the organization creates opportunity to strengthen
DEIA as part of organizational culture.
RECOMMENDATION 25: Develop strategies and provide support for supervisors to
facilitate building from the foundation and culture of trust staff have with their
immediate supervisor by developing strategies to strengthen DEIA acceptance and
practice throughout the City.
54
CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS
The real value of this assessment is that City leadership openly sought the perspectives
and viewpoints of employees related to organizational culture, diversity, equity,
inclusion, and access. By taking this step, the City as an entity, leaders, and employees
exhibited extraordinary courage and vulnerability during a time that followed
significant organizational trauma and leadership change. A marker of an inclusive
organization is one that is willing to peel back the layers of organizational culture and
be open to critical review and feedback. With this in mind, we see great promise for
creating and sustaining inclusion as a part of organizational culture at the City of
Ashland well into the future.
The people who make the City of Ashland what it is now and what it can be in the
future were candid, frank, and unfiltered. They expressed some frustrations about
transparency — and doubt — that change will occur because of this project. As outside
observers, we have less doubt. The key to being successful with staff is sharing the
results of this project, and then moving forward with planned and strategic change.
We offer this general guidance.
1. Avoid administering surveys or other major data collection efforts for at least a
year. People are experiencing survey fatigue, and when those surveys connect
to DEIA, they're experiencing DEIA fatigue.
2. Continue with collegial programs and efforts that highlight and celebrate the
diversity in the workforce and community. Positive reinforcement of DEIA values
and perspectives will likely result in greater long-term gains than negative
reinforcement.
3. Create opportunities for all staff to be part of the vision and strategy for
enhancing DEIA throughout the organization. Focus on ways for employees to
exhibit DEIA acceptance and advocacy on their terms but remain inclusive of
everyone.
4. Recognize that change is hard — DEIA change is harder. Some members of the
workforce who are part of the "dominant culture" may feel disconnected and
not included as part of the City. As one person said, "DEI tends to make me
feel unfairly judged... DEI asks us to focus too much on what makes us different
instead of our common work goals". This is a sentiment we hear often. Find
ways to make all employees, even those who disagree, feel heard and valued.
55
Finally, employees are working toward recovering from what can best be described as
organizational trauma. This trauma is the result of very public discourse about City
management, leadership, and even individual contributors that has instilled a deep
sense of distrust with some important political processes in Ashland. As a result, City
leadership is working on improving DEIA from a disadvantage because they can't fully
tap into the talent that already exists. Consequently, innovation and productivity
suffers, and recruitment of new employees to public service in Ashland may present
challenges because of a public perception that DEIA efforts may be more performative
than authentic. We also heard that the reputation of the City as a place of employment
has been damaged which negatively impacts your ability to identify and recruit
leadership and critical public service jobs.
We also noticed a trend over the past 3-4 months where the City has made important
efforts to be transparent with the public, engage in outreach campaigns, and rebuild
trust with the Ashland community through strategically planned and transparent social
media. We encourage you to keep this work up, and include information about DEIA
initiatives as prospective employees are looking for this kind of connection in places
they want to build careers.
In closing, the Paradigm Team wants to assure the City that we have faith and
confidence in your efforts and work thus far. In many important ways, the City of
Ashland is far ahead of the curve in terms of valuing diversity and inclusion. We see
the same hope and opportunity the current City leadership does — a community where
all perspectives are recognized, valued, and a City government where people are free
to be themselves while still accepting and respecting all the things that make us similar
and different from one another.
56
Appendix A: Survey Results Summary
Q1 Please select the Department or functional area you primarily work
with the City of Ashland.
Answered:138 Skipped:2
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Administration
5.07%
7
Office of the City Recorder
0.00%
0
Communications and/or Marketing
0.72%
1
Community Development
9.42%
13
Electric
8.70%
12
Finance
7.25%
10
Fire
18.12%
25
Human Resources
1.45%
2
Information Technology
6.52%
9
Municipal Court
1.45%
2
Parks and Recreation
12.32%
17
Police
12.32%
17
Public Works
16.67%
23
TOTAL
138
Q2 My role with the City of Ashland is best described as:
Answered: 140 - Skipped: 0
Director or
Manager
Supervisor
Staff
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Director or Manager 17.86%
Supervisor 17.14%
Staff 65.00%
TOTAL
Q3 Using the slider below, tell us how long (in years) you've been
employed at the City of Ashland.
Answered: 134 Skipped:6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
ANSWER CHOICES AVERAGE NUMBER TOTAL NUMBER RESPONSES
10 1,358
Total Respondents: 134
Q4 Which best describes your current position, part time or full-time.
Answered:137 Skipped:3
Full Time
Part Time
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
25
24
91
140
134
2/17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Full -Time 98.54% 135
Part Time 1.46% 2
TOTAL 137
Q5 These questions focus on work values of the City. For each statement,
select the one option that most closely matches your experience or
perception.
Answered: 116 Skipped:24
We place great value on
coordinating among
different work teams
We place great value on
every employee being
proactive in their role.
We value employees
using their initiative.
We value employees
taking responsibility for
their work.
We place great value on
showing our appreciation
for the efforts of each
employee.
We value holding each
other accountable for our
actions.
We place great value on
sustaining an inclusive
work environment.
We place great value on
making sure work teams
include people with
diverse perspectives and
experiences.
STRONGLY
AGREE
NEITHER
DISAGREE
STRONGLY
NIA
TOTAL
WEIGHTED
AGREE (1)
(2)
AGREE
(4)
DISAGREE
AVERAGE
NOR
(5)
DISAGREE
(3)
6.90%
48.28%
23.28%
18.97%
2.59%
0.00%
8
56
27
22
3
0
116
3.38
12.07%
44.83%
22.41%
18.10%
2.59%
0.00%
14
52
26
21
3
0
116
3.46
11.21%
56.90%
18.10%
9.48%
3.45%
0.86%
13
66
21
11
4
1
116
3.63
22.41%
54.31%
10.34%
7.76%
5.17%
0.00%
26
63
12
9
6
0
116
3.81
13.04%
34.78%
22.61%
20.87%
7.83%
0.87%
15
40
26
24
9
1
115
3.25
6.90%
43.10%
23.28%
13.79%
11.21%
1.72%
8
50
27
16
13
2
116
3.21
13.79%
43.97%
25.86%
9.48%
4.31%
2.59%
16
51
30
11
5
3
116
3.55
7.76%
32.76%
37.07%
14.66%
4.31%
3.45%
9
38
43
17
5
4
116
3.26
3/17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
BASIC STATISTICS
We place great value on coordinating among different work teams
We place great value on every employee being proactive in their role.
We value employees using their initiative.
We value employees taking responsibility for their work.
We place great value on showing our appreciation for the efforts of
each employee.
We value holding each other accountable for our actions.
We place great value on sustaining an inclusive work environment.
We place great value on making sure work teams include people with
diverse perspectives and experiences.
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEDIAN
MEAN
STANDARD
DEVIATION
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.62
0.95
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.54
1.00
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.37
0.93
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.19
1.03
1.00
5.00
3.00
2.75
1.16
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.79
1.13
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.45
1.00
1.00
5.00
3.00
2.74
0.96
Q6 This set of statements explores accountability at work for the City of
Ashland. For each statement, select the option that best matches your
perception and experiences at work for the Town.
Answered: 116 Skipped:24
Employees and staff are held
accountable when inappropriate
behavior occurs
The City of Ashland has held itself
accountable for providing a fair
environment where different
perspectives are valued.
I believe I am personally
responsible for supporting a fair
environment where different
perspectives are valued and people
are respected.
The City of Ashland values
employees taking accountability for
their work.
STRONGLY
AGREE
NEITHER
DISAGREE
STRONGLY
TOTAL
WEIGHTED
AGREE (1)
(2)
AGREE
(4)
DISAGREE
AVERAGE
NOR
(5)
DISAGREE
(3)
8.62%
38.79%
26.72%
18.10%
7.76%
10
45
31
21
9
116
3.22
6.03%
43.97%
31.900/6
16.38%
1.72%
7
51
37
19
2
116
3.36
43.97%
45.69%
8.62%
1.72%
0.00%
51
53
10
2
0
116
4.32
11.21% 58.62% 16.38% 11.21% 2.59%
13 68 19 13 3 116 3.65
4/17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
BASIC STATISTICS
Employees and staff are held accountable when inappropriate behavior
occurs
The City of Ashland has held itself accountable for providing a fair
environment where different perspectives are valued.
I believe I am personally responsible for supporting a fair environment
where different perspectives are valued and people are respected.
The City of Ashland values employees taking accountability for their
work.
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEDIAN
MEAN
STANDARD
DEVIATION
1.00
5.00
3.00
2.78
1.08
1.00
5.00
2.50
2.64
0.88
1.00
4.00
2.00
1.68
0.70
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.35
0.91
Q7 Using the slider below, on a scale of 1 being the lowest value and 5
being the highest value, how trusted do you feel as an employee at the
City of Ashland? You can also enter the number value in the box to the
right of the question.
Answered: 116 Skipped:24
ANSWER CHOICES AVERAGE NUMBER TOTAL NUMBER RESPONSES
4 458 116
Total Respondents: 116
BASIC STATISTICS
MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEDIAN MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION
1.00 5.00 4.00 3.95 1.14
Q8 Using the slider below, on a scale of 1 being the lowest value and 5
being the highest value, tell us how much do you trust your colleagues and
coworkers at the City of Ashland? You can also enter the number value in
the box to the right of the question.
Answered: 116 Skipped:24
ANSWER CHOICES AVERAGE NUMBER TOTAL NUMBER RESPONSES
4 420 116
Total Respondents: 116
BASIC STATISTICS
MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEDIAN MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION
1.00 5.00 4.00 3.62 1.12
5/17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
Q9 Using the slider below, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the lowest
value and 5 being the highest value, tell us the degree to which you trust
your supervisor. You can also enter the number value in the box to the
right of the question.
Answered: 114 Skipped:26
ANSWER CHOICES AVERAGE NUMBER TOTAL NUMBER RESPONSES
4 482 114
Total Respondents: 114
BASIC STATISTICS
MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEDIAN MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION
1.00 5.00 5.00 4.23 1.15
Q10 Using the slider below, on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being the lowest
value and 5 being the highest value, tell us how much you trust the City
leadership team (that is, the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, and/or
Department Directors). You can also enter the value number in the box to
the right of the question.
Answered: 115 Skipped:25
ANSWER CHOICES AVERAGE NUMBER TOTAL NUMBER RESPONSES
3 334 115
Total Respondents: 115
BASIC STATISTICS
MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEDIAN MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION
0.00 5.00 3.00 2.90 1.43
Q11 Thinking back over your time working at the City of Ashland, Please
respond to each of the following statements with the selection that most
closely matches your perceptions and experiences.
Answered:109 Skipped:31
6/17
I have felt uncomfortable
or treated differently at
the City of Ashland
because of my age.
I have felt uncomfortable
or treated differently at
the City of Ashland
because of my race or
ethnicity.
I have felt uncomfortable
or treated differently at
the City of Ashland
because of my sexual
orientation.
I have felt uncomfortable
or treated differently at
the City of Ashland
because of my gender or
gender identity.
I have felt uncomfortable
or treated differently at
the City of Ashland
because of my religion or
religious beliefs.
I have felt uncomfortable
or treated differently at
the City of Ashland
because of my socio-
economic status.
I have felt uncomfortable
or treated differently at
the City of Ashland
because of a disability
(including physical,
emotional, learning,
invisible, or
psychological).
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
STRONGLY
AGREE
NEITHER
DISAGREE
STRONGLY
NIA
TOTAL WEIGHTED
AGREE (1)
(2)
AGREE
(4)
DISAGREE
AVERAGE
NOR
(5)
DISAGREE
(3)
2.75%
4.59%
19.27%
35.78%
35.78%
1.83%
3
5
21
39
39
2
109 3.99
0.92%
6.42%
10.09%
32.11%
40.37%
10.09%
1
7
11
35
44
11
109 4.16
2.75% 0.00%
3 0
11.93% 33.94%
13 37
4.59% 6.42% 14.68% 31.19%
5 7 16 34
2.75% 1.83% 14.68% 33.94%
3 2 16 37
1.83% 2.75% 14.68% 37.61%
2 3 16 41
2.75% 0.92% 11.93% 34.86%
3 1 13 38
40.37% 11.01%
44 12 109 4.23
37.61% 5.50%
41 6 109 3.96
38.53% 8.26%
42 9 109 4.13
37.61% 5.50%
41 6 109 4.13
36.70% 12.84%
40 14 109 4.17
7/17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
BASIC STATISTICS
I have felt uncomfortable or treated differently at the City of Ashland
because of my age.
I have felt uncomfortable or treated differently at the City of Ashland
because of my race or ethnicity.
I have felt uncomfortable or treated differently at the City of Ashland
because of my sexual orientation.
I have felt uncomfortable or treated differently at the City of Ashland
because of my gender or gender identity.
I have felt uncomfortable or treated differently at the City of Ashland
because of my religion or religious beliefs.
I have felt uncomfortable or treated differently at the City of Ashland
because of my socio-economic status.
I have felt uncomfortable or treated differently at the City of Ashland
because of a disability (including physical, emotional, learning,
invisible, or psychological).
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEDIAN
MEAN
STANDARD
DEVIATION
1.00
5.00
4.00
3.99
1.00
1.00
5.00
4.00
4.16
0.96
1.00
5.00
4.00
4.23
0.90
1.00
5.00
4.00
3.96
1.12
1.00
5.00
4.00
4.13
0.96
1.00
5.00
4.00
4.13
0.91
1.00
5.00
4.00
4.17
0.93
Q12 Please respond to the following statements with the selection that
most closely matches your perception and/or experiences at the City of
Ashland.
Answered: 109 Skipped:31
STRONGLY
AGREE
NEITHER
DISAGREE
STRONGLY
TOTAL
WEIGHTED
AGREE (1)
(2)
AGREE
(4)
DISAGREE
AVERAGE
NOR
(5)
DISAGREE
(3)
1 feel respected at the City of
16.51%
54.13%
15.60%
11.01%
2.75%
Ashland.
18
59
17
12
3
109
3.71
The City of Ashland is a
19.44%
48.15%
16.67%
13.89%
1.85%
comfortable place to be and work.
21
52
18
15
2
108
3.69
1 feel comfortable with the climate
24.77%
44.04%
20.18%
11.01%
0.00%
related to diversity and inclusion in
27
48
22
12
0
109
3.83
my department, division, or work
team.
I am able to disagree with my
29.63%
43.52%
11.11%
12.96%
2.78%
supervisor without fear of
32
47
12
14
3
108
3.84
retaliation.
I respect my direct supervisor.
57.01%
30.84%
5.61%
3.74%
2.80%
61
33
6
4
3
107
4.36
As a whole, I respect the current
16.67%
41.67%
23.15%
12.96%
5.56%
leadership team (including, Interim
18
45
25
14
6
108
3.51
City Manager/Deputy City
Manager, and Directors).
I feel that my performance is fairly
14.81%
43.52%
24.07%
12.96%
4.63%
evaluated.
16
47
26
14
5
108
3.51
8/17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
BASIC STATISTICS
I feel respected at the City of Ashland.
The City of Ashland is a comfortable place to be and work.
I feel comfortable with the climate related to diversity and inclusion in
my department, division, or work team.
I am able to disagree with my supervisor without fear of retaliation.
I respect my direct supervisor.
As a whole, I respect the current leadership team (including, Interim
City Manager/Deputy City Manager, and Directors).
I feel that my performance is fairly evaluated.
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEDIAN
MEAN
STANDARD
DEVIATION
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.29
0.96
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.31
0.99
1.00
4.00
2.00
2.17
0.93
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.16
1.07
1.00
5.00
1.00
1.64
0.95
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.49
1.08
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.49
1.04
Q13 As you think about the work environment at the City of Ashland and
how people interact with one another, rate each of the following statements
based on your perceptions and observations.
Answered:109 Skipped:31
9/17
I believe the City of
Ashland is a welcoming
place based on race
and/or ethnicity.
I believe the City of
Ashland is a welcoming
place for people of all
sexes (that is, born male,
female, or intersex).
I believe the City of
Ashland is a welcoming
place for people of all
gender identities (that is,
how people choose to
identify their gender
regardless of the sex
assigned to them at birth).
I believe the City of
Ashland is a welcoming
place regardless of age.
I believe the City of
Ashland is welcoming to
people from different
socioeconomic statuses.
I believe the City of
Ashland is a welcoming
place regardless of
disability (including
physical, learning, or
emotional and
psychological disabilities).
I believe that diversity and
inclusion makes the City
of Ashland a better place
to work.
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
STRONGLY
AGREE
NEITHER
DISAGREE
STRONGLY
NIA
TOTAL WEIGHTED
AGREE (1)
(2)
AGREE
(4)
DISAGREE
AVERAGE
NOR
(5)
DISAGREE
(3)
17.59%
55.56%
14.81%
5.56%
2.78%
3.70%
19
60
16
6
3
4
108 3.83
17.43%
55.96%
13.76%
5.50%
2.75%
4.59%
19
61
15
6
3
5
109 3.84
12.84% 48.62% 25.69% 4.59% 2.75% 5.50%
14 53 28 5 3 6 109 3.68
21.10%
57.80%
12.84%
3.67%
1.83%
2.75%
23
63
14
4
2
3 109 3.95
16.51%
59.63%
14.68%
2.75%
3.67%
2.75%
18
65
16
3
4
3 109 3.85
14.68%
55.05%
22.02%
3.67%
1.83%
2.75%
16
60
24
4
2
3 109 3.79
26.61% 40.37% 15.60% 7.34% 6.42% 3.67%
29 44 17 8 7 4 109 3.76
10 / 17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
BASIC STATISTICS
I believe the City of Ashland is a welcoming place based on race
and/or ethnicity.
I believe the City of Ashland is a welcoming place for people of all
sexes (that is, born male, female, or intersex).
I believe the City of Ashland is a welcoming place for people of all
gender identities (that is, how people choose to identify their gender
regardless of the sex assigned to them at birth).
I believe the City of Ashland is a welcoming place regardless of age.
I believe the City of Ashland is welcoming to people from different
socioeconomic statuses.
I believe the City of Ashland is a welcoming place regardless of
disability (including physical, learning, or emotional and psychological
disabilities).
I believe that diversity and inclusion makes the City of Ashland a
better place to work.
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEDIAN
MEAN
STANDARD
DEVIATION
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.17
0.89
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.16
0.89
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.32
0.87
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.05
0.82
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.15
0.87
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.21
0.81
1.00
5.00
2.00
2.24
1. ].3
Q14 "Microaggression" is a term used to describe slight verbal or small
behavioral differences that can be interpreted as discriminatory. These
behaviors can be intentional or unintentional. For this set of questions,
please consider your experiences and observations throughout your
interactions with people at work among employees, teams, and
Departments at the City of Ashland.
Answered:109 Skipped:31
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
EVERY
EVERY
A FEW
ALMOST
NEVER
TOTAL
WEIGHTED
WEEK
MONTH
TIMES
NEVER
(5)
AVERAGE
(1)
(2)
A
(4)
YEAR
(3)
1 have experienced or observed comments or
1.85%
7.41%
12.96%
37.04%
40.74%
actions that I perceive as discriminatory against
2
8
14
40
44
108
1.93
women.
I have experienced or observed comments or
1.85%
0.93%
8.33%
31.48%
57.41%
actions that I perceive as discriminatory against
2
1
9
34
62
108
1.58
people based on race or ethnicity.
I have experienced or observed comments or
0.92%
2.75%
10.09%
34.86%
51.38%
actions that I perceive as discriminatory against
1
3
11
38
56
109
1.67
people based on age.
I have experienced or observed comments or
0.00%
3.67%
13.76%
27.52%
55.05%
actions that I perceive as being discriminatory
0
4
15
30
60
109
1.66
against people based on gender identity (e.g., gay,
lesbian, transgender, bisexual, gender fluid, non -
binary, or other gender identity).
I have experienced or observed comments or
actions that I perceive as discriminatory against
people with physical disabilities.
I have experienced or observed comments or
actions that I perceive as discriminatory against
people with mental health challenges.
BASIC STATISTICS
0.00%
0.92%
2.75%
25.69%
70.64%
0
1
3
28
77 109 1.34
0.92%
2.75%
7.34%
33.94%
55.05%
1
3
8
37
60 109 1.61
I have experienced or observed comments or actions that I perceive
as discriminatory against women.
I have experienced or observed comments or actions that I perceive
as discriminatory against people based on race or ethnicity.
I have experienced or observed comments or actions that I perceive
as discriminatory against people based on age.
I have experienced or observed comments or actions that I perceive
as being discriminatory against people based on gender identity (e.g.,
gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual, gender fluid, non -binary, or other
gender identity).
I have experienced or observed comments or actions that I perceive
as discriminatory against people with physical disabilities.
I have experienced or observed comments or actions that I perceive
as discriminatory against people with mental health challenges.
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEDIAN
MEAN
STANDARD
DEVIATION
1.00
5.00
4.00
4.07
1.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
4.42
0.83
1.00
5.00
5.00
4.33
0.84
2.00
5.00
5.00
4.34
0.85
2.00
5.00
5.00
4.66
0.58
1.00
5.00
5.00
4.39
0.81
Q15 What best describes your gender?
Answered:105 Skipped:35
12/17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
Female
Intersex I
Male
Non -binary I
Another gender
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Female
38.10%
40
I ntersex
0.95%
1
Male
58.10%
61
Non -binary
0.95%
1
Another gender
1.90%
2
TOTAL
105
Q16 What is your race?
Answered:104 Skipped:36
13 / 17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
None of the
above
African
American/Black
American
Indian or...
Asian
Native
Hawaiian or...
White
Two or more ■
races
Another race
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
None of the above
2.88%
3
African American/Black
0.00%
0
American Indian or Alaska Native
1.92%
2
Asian
0.00%
0
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
1.92%
2
White
83.65%
87
Two or more races
6.73%
7
Another race
2.88%
3
TOTAL
104
Q17 I am Hispanic, Latina, Latino, or Latink
Answered:105 Skipped:35
14/17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
Yes
No
I'm not sure.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes 4.76%
No 91.43%
I'm not sure. 3.81%
TOTAL
Q18 I have a disability that substantially limits one or more major life
activity. A disability can include physical, emotional, or learning.
Disabilities can also be seen or unseen by others.
Answered:105 Skipped:35
Yes. 0
No.
I'm not sure.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
5
96
4
105
15 / 17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
ANSWER CHOICES
RESPONSES
Yes.
9.52%
No.
86.67%
I'm not sure.
3.81%
TOTAL
Q19 What is your current age (in years)?
Answered:100 Skipped:40
10
91
4
105
Q20 Have you ever served in any branch of the United States military, or
not?
Yes, Ihave 0
No, I have not
Answered:107 Skipped:33
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes, I have 10.28% 11
No, I have not 89.72% 96
TOTAL 107
Q21 What do you think the City of Ashland could do to enhance diversity,
equity, and inclusion at work?
Answered:66 Skipped:74
Q22 Is there anything you think the City should stop doing in support of
the goal of enhancing diversity, equity, and inclusion?
Answered:53 Skipped:87
16 / 17
City of Ashland DEIA and Culture
Q23 Is there anything about your experiences with workplace climate and
diversity, equity, and inclusion you'd like us to know about? Your
responses are anonymous, so please feel free to add as much detail as
you'd like.
Answered:43 Skipped:97
17 / 17
IMPLEMENTATION
STRATEGY AND
ROADMAP
C I T Y OF
ND
February 2024
= PARADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY AND ROADMAP
CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON
ITY OF
S H LA N D
Targeted Universalism is an approach developed by powell, Menendian, and Ake' to creating public policy that means setting universal
goals (that is, goals that apply to everyone, regardless of position, role, or element of diversity) that are achieved through targeted
processes. As responses are targeted, the deployed strategies address the degree to which different groups within the environment
access and attain the universal goal. In other words, to achieve equity, there may be some instances where goal attainment is unequal
because different groups have different needs. In other words, Targeted Universalism seeks to move beyond equality and toward
equity. It is a particularly useful framework for addressing elements of diversity and belonging in public policy. We're modifying this
approach to address operational policies and practices that impede full belonging and welcomeness within the organizational culture of
the City of Ashland.
For the City of Ashland, we identified 3 macro -level goals related to internal culture and belonging that include:
an All staff and employees of the City of Ashland engage in their work without structural barriers or impediments to inclusion and
belonging.'
Rebuild and strengthen organizational trust internally and with externally with elected officials.
moo° The City of Ashland is a place that supports and practices diversity, equity, inclusion, and access in many forms and expressions.
For each of these broad goals there are specific impediments to goal attainment that need to be addressed through a targeted
response. These responses connect to findings and recommendations set forth in the DEIA, Culture and Belonging Assessment.
Targeted Universalism involves intentional decision making about how elements of diversity and inclusion are connected to populations
of people who may experience disadvantage. Once it is understood how policies impact populations of diversity, it is followed by
constructive process to achieve both equity and equality in a way that doesn't "take away" from other populations. In other words,
1 powell, j. Menendian, S., & Ake, W. (2019). Targeted Universalism: Policy and Practice. Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society. University of California at
Berkeley. https:Hbelonging.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/targeted_universalism_primer.pdf?file=l&force=l.
Z The term "structural" refers to those artifacts that support government including organizational structure, policies, procedures, and high-level mission and value
statements.
1 PA
RADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
policy decisions are made with an eye on both equity in and equality. Targeted Universalism balances the needs of all groups, removes
barriers for disadvantaged groups, and creates a foundation for equitable belonging. A visual representation helps understand how
targeted universalism works.
Si 2014, Saskat'.mn Health Region
Sources: Elmina B. Sewall Foundation and Saskatoon Health Region Advancing Health Equity
The above graphic is a good visual representation of Targeted Universalism. Each figure receives the baseline support to gain what
they need. Some figures receive targeted interventions to ensure equality. In this way, Targeted Universalism results in moving past
equal treatment and toward equitable outcomes. In turn, belongingness is achieved because each person or group can experience a
sense that they were treated fairly and received the tools, knowledge, and resources to thrive.
In addition to conceptual inspiration of Targeted Universalism, this implementation strategy uses a change management process based
on data acquired during the DEIA assessment process and the findings and recommendations generated in that report.
2 PARADIGM
PUBLICAFFAIRS
FPARADIGM
OOPUBLIC AFFAIRS
Disc,
Readiness Professional Strategy and
Development Implementation
Through the DEIA assessment process, the Paradigm team touched on several elements of this model including discovery,
understanding the perspectives and experiences of leaders, identified areas where communication could be improved, examined overall
inclusivity, gained insight on staff readiness, and identified some professional development needs. This document includes an
implementation strategy. We did not explore public policy issues, which may be an area the City wishes to examine later.
3 '103-P PUBLIC AFAIRS
Goal 1: All staff and employees of the City of Ashland engage in their work without structural
barriers or impediments to inclusion and belonging.
Targeted
Rec
Timeframe
Steps
outputs
Outcome Measures
Response
Mapping
Support the
3, 5, 11,
January
Assess organizational and
Employee facing activities related
Establish a baseline
Human
12, 16,
2024 —
fiscal impact of
to compensation and benefits,
measurement of HR
Resources
19.
July 2024
strengthening the HR
performance evaluation,
related employee
Department to
Department to include an
recruitment/onboa rding/retention
complaints; establish
build
assessment of staffing,
are centrally located. HR staffing
measures with incremental
organizational
technology needs.
levels are sufficient to support
progress goals.
capacity and
citywide culture and belonging
operate with
Determine additional and
needs. HR related employee
Establish compliance
reasonable
future staffing needs and
complaints are reduced.
baselines for training,
autonomy.
seek appropriation request.
onboarding, and
Updated Employee Handbook
promotion, and success
Design and distribute an
that is accessible to all staff.
and track annually.
Employee Handbook to
Establish baseline measures
ensure all staff know current
related to behaviors and
Track distribution of
policy structure,
performance expectations of all
revised Employee
understand, and practice
staff.
Handbook to staff;
the behaviors that support
establish baseline
the City.
Clarified and transparent
measures of desired goals
organizational structure and
and measure annually to
Clarify reporting
reporting relationships.
track performance to
relationships, particularly
determine if wider and
among staff who "wear
Prioritization areas of greatest
consistent distribution
many hats".
need in terms of staff recruitment.
improves DEIA related
outcomes.
4 �P BLIICC AFFAIRS
Ensure equitable workload
Improvements to candidate pool
Establish a baseline
distribution among staff.
for open positions that addresses
measurement of
organizational prioritization of
performance measures
Develop and track DEIA
elements of DEIA.
associated with "multiple
development goals for staff,
hats" reporting
supervisors, and leadership.
Employee engagement in DEIA
relationships; establish
related learning and practice for
performance goals to
Design a recruitment and
all staff at a level that is consistent
improve efficiency and
hiring process that takes
with their role and level of DEIA
sustain equitable workload
into consideration
development.
goals.
employment needs and
desires of potential
Data -driven information about
Establish baseline
candidates.
demographic and community
recruitment and hiring
changes that impact recruitment
goals for each
Using data from various City
and selection for open positions.
department; on a
departments and US
quarterly basis track
Census reporting,
outcomes and make
determine projected rates
adjustments as necessary.
of community growth,
economic conditions, and
other factors.
Focus on DEIA
2, 5, 9,
June 24 —
Design and include DEIA
Identification of baseline measure
In 2024, establish baseline
as part of
10,11
June 25
related performance
of DEIA performance outcomes
measures and then track
organizational
measures as part of annual
for all staff that sets expectations
annually using
culture and
performance reviews.
regarding behavioral norms.
performance review data.
operations;
ensure targeted
Create opportunities for
Incremental annual goals for
In 2024, establish a
response that
staff to self -identify an
performance improvement based
baseline measurement of
addresses
annual goal related to DEIA
on the baseline measure.
DEIA individual goals,
microaggressions
(e.g., enroll in a workshop,
PARADIGM
PID-PUBLIC AFFAIRS
toward women
serve on an internal
Reward achievement of individual
then track annually
and members of
committee).
performance goals and measure
thereafter.
the LGBTQIA
organizational impact.
community.
Engage in long range
By the end of the 2024 3rd
planning for growth and
Structural and continual support
quarter, establish a
contingency planning.
to employees that confirms
baseline assessment of
expectations related to behaviors
city-wide performance
Strengthen the
that are inclusive of all staff and
objectives and design a
performance evaluation
community engagements.
method to measure on a
process to encourage
quarterly basis thereafter.
supervisors to address
Improved knowledge among staff
employee behaviors and
related to impacts of
By the end of the 2024 4tn
missteps through
microaggressions and
quarter, develop and
supportive and timely
microaggression deterrence
implement a contingency
interaction as they occur
behaviors.
planning process for the
rather than waiting for the
City.
annual performance
Reduction in number/percentage
process.
of staff who perceive that they are
By the end of the 2025 1"
targets of microaggression within
quarter, establish baseline
Develop a mid -year "check-
the organization.
measures of
in" process for supervisors
number/percent of
to meet with individual
employees engaged
contributors to discuss
microaggression
performance goals and
deterrence professional
engage in coaching to
development; measure
improve performance
quarterly thereafter.
and/or goal achievement.
By the end of the 2025 2nd
Develop and implement
quarter, readminister the
City-wide education and
section of the Culture and
Belonging survey to assess
PARADIGM
rM,PUBLIC AFFAIRS
development on
microaggressions.
Develop a method to
provide additional support
and learning to staff who
engage in micro -aggressive
behaviors and to people
who are the targets of such
behaviors.
impact of targeted
interventions on
microaggression
outcomes. Assess
annually thereafter.
Leverage the
2, 8, 12
September
Develop formal
Identification and closure of
By the end of the 4t'
power of a
2024 —
mechanisms for cross -team
service delivery gaps.
quarter of 2024, establish
relatively small
December
collaboration to engrain
a baseline measure of the
staff to work
2025
DEIA into organizational
Improved structure of cross -team
number of cross -team
together to solve
culture to include reporting
collaboration to include reporting
collaborations and
organizational
relationships; identify
relationships and performance
performance measures for
challenges
organizational performance
measurement.
each to assess community
related to work
measures.
and operational impact.
flow and service
Engage in a process to
Improved employee engagement
By the end of the 2n1
delivery.
identify service delivery
in processes that impact their
quarter 2025 establish a
gaps by Department, then
work efforts.
baseline measurement of
collaborate with
service delivery gaps and
department leadership and
establish performance
key staff to identify where
improvement measures;
efficiency improvements
measure on a quarterly
could be attained by multi-
basis.
team collaboration; engage
staff throughout the
By the end of the 1st
organization in this process.
quarter 2025, assess and
measure the
number/percentage of
PARADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Identify a cross -team
cross team collaborations,
collaboration coordinator to
identify improvement
provide high-level
targets for the upcoming
engagement and oversite
year, and assess quarterly
of the process.
through 2026.
Goal 2: Rebuild and strengthen organizational trust internally and externally with elected
officials.
Targeted Response
Rec
Timeframe
Steps
outputs
Outcome Measures
Mapping
Improve leader -to-
14, 15
January
Identify where
Improved employee engagement
By the end of 25 Q1,
individual
2025 —
communication gaps
in process that impact their work
conduct an assessment of
contributor
December
between individual
and career success.
communication gaps and
communication
20025
contributors, supervisors,
establish a baseline
channels.
Department leadership,
Development of an improved
measure of the number of
and City Executive
communication strategy to ensure
communications,
Leadership occur.
important information is received
communication deficits,
by staff members in a timely way.
and successfully
Involve staff in the
transmitted information as
design 2-way
Opportunities for employees to
a baseline measure. Then,
communication
engage in "risk -free" reporting to
measure semi-annually
mechanisms that
improve the quality of
from that point forward to
employees perceive will
communications from staff to
gauge success of
support improved
leadership that supports
improvements.
communication.
immediate intervention and
resolution.
If necessary, implement a
"risk -free" reporting
8 PARADIGM
'103-PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Determine the benefits,
Strengthened relationships
procedure by the end of
if any, of anonymous
between staff and executive
25 Q2, then during Q3
reporting technology.
leadership.
conduct a baseline
measurement of reports
Develop a
Operational policy development to
received, reports resolved,
communication cascade
support continual and timely
and actions taken. Then
strategy for the City for
communication.
measure quarterly from
essential, organizational
that point forward.
information.
By the end of 24 Q4,
Continue and enhance
implement a
efforts from Human
communication cascade
Resources to engage in
strategy and conduct a
meaningful, 2-way
baseline measurement in
communication from the
25 Q1. Establish
HR Director to staff.
performance goals and
measure semi-annually
Develop a policy
from that point forward.
regarding timeliness in
reviewing written
In 25 Q4, conduct an
communications.
assessment using
Developed a regularly
questions from the Culture
scheduled employee
and Belonging survey to
communications forum
gauge whether
to include opportunities
improvements in
for staff to ask questions
employee perceptions
and have them answered
have improved and set
by the City Manager.
performance goals with
semi-annual measurement
from that point forward.
PARADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
By the end of 25 Q2,
launch a regularly
scheduled program (may
include employee listening
sessions and/or written
Q&A for employees to ask
questions of the City
Manager. Track staff
participation and concern
resolution on a quarterly
basis from that point
forward.
Continue to
17,18, 19
January
Provide leaders with
Lower employee turnaround,
By the end of 2025 Q2, 90
enhance
2025—
professional
improved organizational culture
percent of leadership team
relationships
December
development to
participates in professional
between
2025
strengthen leadership
development activities that
leaders/supervisors
skill, adaptivity, and
may include coaching.
and staff.
empathetic leadership.
Provide annual refresher
professional development
to strengthen inclusion
and empathetic leadership
skill. Track participation
annually.
Improve team
19, 20,
January
Work with Department
Insight on where leaders are
In 25 Q3, identify a new
collaboration and
21, 22,
2025—
directors to determine
aligned in terms of inclusive
pattern of practice for
problem resolution
25
December
development needs that
leadership, where they are not,
leaders based on
by strengthening
2025
support skill -building in
and understand the nature of any
empathetic leadership and
leadership skills of
leadership and conflict
gaps that exist.
set performance goals.
direct supervisors
resolution.
Assess on a semi-annal
10 �PBRAD FGM
Secure. resources to
Leaders and supervisors engage in
basis from that point
provide professional
inclusive leadership strategies and
forward.
development and
strengthen connections with direct
support to supervisors
reports.
By 25 Q4, determine if
and leaders based on
appropriations requests to
need and interest.
Articulate those areas of public
support leadership
and operational policies where
development are needed
Engage in a values
improved leadership impacts
(and make request as
alignment process to
service delivery.
necessary); identify
gain insight from leaders
performance goals as
about their capacity and
needed to support
willingness to engage in
appropriations request.
DEIA supportive actions.
By 26 Q1, draft
Provide guidance on
operational and public
inclusive leadership to
policy objectives with
promote a productive
performance goals for
workplace with a focus
inclusive/empathetic
on inclusion.
leadership as necessary.
Track performance on a
quarterly basis moving
forward.
Continue efforts to
NA
March
Continue efforts to
build trust and
2024 —
strengthen the
align community
December
relationship between
service objectives
2025
City government
between City staff
executive leadership and
and elected
elected leaders.
leadership.
Consider requesting
space on City Council
11 �P BLRADFGR
meeting agendas to
meet staff from various
departments throughout
the city and provide
updates on efforts each
department is making to
improve inclusion with a
focus on successes.
Invite City Council
members to participate
and/or observe DEIA
activities within City
government.
Consider hosting public
events that create
opportunities to bring
elected leadership
together with staff to
build a community
culture of inclusion.
12 P1.0-PUBLICP RADFGM
Goal 3: The City of Ashland is a place that supports and practices diversity, equity,
inclusion, and access in many forms and expressions.
Targeted
Rec
Timeframe
StepsOutputs
Outcome Measures
Response
Mapping
Organizational
NA
Engage in a professional
85 percent participation of all
By the end of 25 Q1,
Learning about
development program to
staff.
facilitate education and
Recognizing and
encourage staff to
assess baseline
Managing
recognizing and manage
Develop job aids for supervisors
measurement of staff
Implicit Bias.
implicit bias.
on facilitating conversations with
participation. Then set
staff about elements of diversity
goals and measures to
Provide professional
including race, history of Oregon
evaluate long term impact
development and other
related to race exclusion, and
of education.
guidance to supervisors
team building.
on facilitating difficult
By the end of 25 Q2
conversations and
provide professional
modeling desired
development to
inclusive behaviors.
supervisors on facilitating
difficult conversations.
Track participation in
education and execution
of conversations with staff
on a semi-annual basis.
Re -energize the
NA
March 2024
Determine staff interest in
Normalized inclusion and
By the end of 2024 Q3, re-
interna DEIA
-June 2025
re-engaging in the DEIA
belonging among staff;
establish the DEIA staff
Committee
staff committee.
employees voluntarily engage in
committee, recruit
at -work programs and activities.
membership, and develop
Develop internal
Develop purpose and
a meeting schedule.
programming to
role for DEIA staff
13 �P BIRADFGR
encourage staff
committee and provide
Beginning in 2025 Q3
to voluntarily
support to the committee
begin DEIA programming.
engage in pro-
in terms of group
Track number of
inclusion
development and DEIA
participants with an
activities.
modeling.
incremental goal of
increasing participation at
Develop internal
each event.
programs for staff and
leaders to normalize DEIA
behaviors. Some
alternatives may include
activities such as book
groups, Lunch & Learns,
guest speakers, gamified
activities
14 PARADIGM
I T Y O F
ASHLAND
Summary of Findings, Recommendations, and Priorities
r-ues vioiT15f be d pLFrsonal ""'
responsibility are important to employees, but may stifle creativity and innovation.
1 Retain and sustain the work value taking accountability for their own work and continuing to support
employees using initiative, particularly around problem solving. The City may want to consider developing
incentives for employees, such as reward or award processes that emphasize positive outcomes and/or
proactive problem resolution through team participation and collaboration. Priority
2 Increase organizational capacity for creating and sustaining teams that value diverse experiences, perspectives,
and thought. Processes to consider may include cross -training and the development of multi -disciplinary teams
to resolve high level problems and challenges. An example might be collaboration between public work teams
and the police department to resolve traffic enforcement at intersections with high accident rates.
Finding 2: Employees feel accountable for producing good work, but don't perceive the
city holding itself accountable for sustaining a fair work environment.
3 Retain the work values associated with individual accountability for work product and fairness. Consider adding
a performance factor to the annual evaluation process that focuses on assessing the degree to which individual
contributors support a fair environment that values different perspectives.
4 Provide coaching and resources to managers and supervisors related to conflict management and engaging in
difficult conversations with staff related to conduct and behavioral violations of conditions of employment at
early stages to support open and clear two-way communication channels about challenges, opportunities, and
behaviors associated with work product.
5 Consider processes and support to supervisors to strengthen their ability to address behavioral missteps of
staff in a timely manner. The City may consider strengthening performance evaluation processes to encourage
supervisors to comment on communication and behaviors, both positive and negative, as a mechanism to
encourage respectful engagement with each other and the community as well as to support a cultural norm of
sitive intent in communication.
= PARADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
--,C I T Y O F
ASHLAND
6 Develop skill building and guidance for supervisors to recognize disrespectful behaviors of people that report
to them early and offer interventions and meaningful coaching to address behavioral missteps in the spirit of
coaching and support instead of a more punitive approach to teambuilding.
7 Engage with staff through focus groups and small group discussions to re -design and execute an annual
performance evaluation process that is perceived by employees to be fair, transparent, and captures values
and contributions of staff on an annual basis.
Finding 3: Some employees view DEIA as a low priority that negatively impacts
accountability and work productivity.
Develop strategies to encourage employees to explore the connections between work productivity,
accountability, and DEIA in ways that are private and personalized, and allow them to see the organizational
value of DEI in ways they can personalize and use at work.
Finding 4: Microaggressions throughout the City tend to be aimed toward people who
identify as female.
9 Develop planned and strategic pathways to provide learning to City employees about gender and gender -
identity diversity that helps employees identify stereotypes while supporting inclusive behavior.
10 Develop mechanisms to support a work environment where people can be confident and feel psychologically
safe about gender, gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation and expression on their terms,
mitigates risk exposure, and supports a healthy workplace.
11 Develop an operational policy related to behavioral expectations related to conduct and microaggressions that
defines and prohibits micro -aggressive behaviors of all types. Distribute information about reporting
mechanisms and graduated sanctions and penalties. Additionally, create performance metrics aimed at
reducing prevalence of microaggressions across all groups.
Finding 5: Strengthening and supporting leadership skills, including conflict management,
is needed to resolve team building by direct supervisors.
12 Enhance support and professional development to immediate supervisors about strategies to leverage
inclusion that encourages individual employees to contribute to team problem solving and resolution, identify
and achieve team -based performance goals, and personalize value of DEIA in achieving career progression
and performance.
2 = PARADIGM
Pl---PUBLIC AFFAIRS
__,-<�y--,C I T Y O F
ASHAND
13
As part of the annual evaluation process, City executive leadership should require that Directors and
employees with supervisory responsibilities identify a professional development goal of:
1. Participating in a training opportunity or workshop associated with improving communication skills,
DEIA, or team problem solving,
OR
2. Setting a measurable performance goal that demonstrates team collaboration and communication that
utilizes strategies associated with inclusive leadership to solve a particular challenge or improve service
delivery.
Finding 6: Communication deficits erode trust which weakens trust between employees,
su ervisors, and City leadershi
14
City leadership and immediate supervisors should collaborate with each other about identifying where
communication gaps may be occurring, then construct a communication strategy to ensure critical information
flows downstream to staff in a clear and timely way. This communication strategy may include touchpoints
within the communication flow that requires signature (e.g., director, supervisor, employee) for mission critical
communications.
15
Consider the development of establishing two-way communication mechanisms for staff to engage directly
with directors and City leadership. Options may include exploring technologies that allow for anonymous
reporting (e.g., fraud and abuse reporting technology), and greater opportunities for direct communication
between employees, directors, and city executive leadership.
16
Update and develop a comprehensive Employee Handbook that includes all current policies and regulations
that pertain to employee experience throughout the full employment life cycle from recruitment and selection
to retirement, including succession planning. Update this book at least biannually, and consider distributing
through multiple formats (e.g., web -based, paper, or optimized for tablets and remote devices).
Finding 7: City leadership should clarify and define goals, objectives, and metrics with a
.iQLcus on measurement and planned incremental change for the future.
17
Engage in a leadership alignment process to identify goals, objectives, and measures from the perspective of
leaders that support building a culture of inclusion and organizational belongingness at the City of Ashland.
As an example, this process may follow this structure, but elements and areas of focus should be unique to City
needs.
= PARADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
CITY OF
AS
HLAND
18
Conduct a gap analysis and design a strategy to connect employee perceptions of trust and accountability (see
Recommendation 14) and results from leadership alignment (Recommendation 17). Utilize this strategy as part
of the City's strategy for DEI sustainability.
Finding 8: Shift attention toward strategies that focus on inclusive leadership and away
from diversity management.
19
In order to strengthen trust, the City Leadership Team should move toward inclusion leadership with an
emphasis on sustaining a productive workplace where employees are encouraged to express their opinions,
and input is sought before important organizational decision making in a manner that supports voice,
perspective, and involvement of all employees, including those with different perspectives including race,
ethnicity, age, gender, gender identity, and disability as a long-range goal and strategy rather than focusing on
diversity management.
Finding 9: impediments to a psychologically safe work environment are connected to race,
ethnicity, gender, and gender identity.
20
Continue efforts to encourage respect and value the differences among the workforce that includes developing
strategies to create opportunities for learning, sharing, and understanding that the strength that diversity and
PV
inclusion has on the work experience and organizational trust.
21
Provide additional support to direct supervisors related to recognizing and valuing differences among their
team, including education on recognizing the early signs of conflict and effective conflict management that
supports early identification and resolution.
22
Readminister the Culture and Belonging survey (minimally, the construct of organizational comfort) no sooner
than one year from the release of this report to determine whether measurable change has occurred related to
comfort and trust.
Finding 10: Most employees perceive the City as welcoming, but there are some barriers.
23
Develop a recruitment and retention strategy that leverages the strengths of appealing to new employees-�
through non -conventional compensation packages. At the same time, develop strategies to strengthen
organizational commitment related to multiple elements of diversity that may improve retention of employees
and create avenues for diverse recruitment strategies including greater use of advanced technologies and
social media.
= PARADIGM
�PUBLIc AFFAIRS
ITY OF
ASHLAND
Finding 11: Some employees fear retaliation by supervisors or leadership, but not as
defined by Federal or State labor laws.
24
We did not identify any incidents of retaliation as defined by federal or state law through our assessment
process. As such, we make no recommendations related to legal retaliation, but view the perceptions of staff
as indicators of lower than ideal levels of trust in terms of decision making that benefits employees directly. We
refer to recommendations related to trust and team building in Part II of this report for specific strategies.
Finding 12: High levels of trust and respect for supervisors throughout the organization
creates opportunity to strengthen DEIA as part of organizational culture.
25
Develop strategies and provide support for supervisors to facilitate building from the foundation and culture of
trust staff have with their immediate supervisor by developing strategies to strengthen DEIA acceptance and
practice throughout the City.
— PARADIGM
PI-1—PuBLic AFFAIRS
•�•, Council Business Meeting
Date
Agenda Item
Contract for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Assessment with Paradigm Public
Affairs, LLC
From
Sabrina Cotta
Deputy City Manager
Contact
Sabrina.cotta(o)ashland.or.us 541-552-2106
Item Type
Requested by Council ❑ Update ❑ Request for Direction ® Presentation ❑
SUMMARY
In June of 2022 Council gave direction to conduct a DEI assessment of the City organization as recommended
by the Social Equity and Justice Commission. $40,000 was appropriated for this purpose. The City has
conducted a successful RFP process and Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC has been selected to conduct the
assessment.
POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED
In the summer 2022, the City Council adopted Vision and Value Statements for the City. This includes being an
open, welcoming community for all, the Organization has the values: Respect for the citizens we serve and the
work we do. Excellence in governance and city services.
BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In June of 2022 the City Council appropriated $40,000 to conduct an internal DEI assessment of the City
Organization. The RFP was published December 1, 2022, on both the City of Ashland website and the
Oregonbuys.gov which is the preferred site for posting all RFPs published in Oregon. The deadline to ask
questions about the RFP was January 16, 2023, and answers were posted on the City's website. The deadline to
respond to the RFP was February 17, 2023.
100 plus entities downloaded the RFP and the City received 20 viable responses. The responses were reviewed
and scored by five staff people based on the scoring criteria detailed in the RFP.
FISCAL IMPACTS
$40,000 in already appropriated funds for this purpose.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Next steps will include ensuring a Human Resources Director is brought on board with the City and extensive
messaging by the City Manager's office is utilized to prepare the Organization for this assessment. The Human
Resources Director will be the main point person with support from the City Manager's office. The assessment
will begin in September 2023 to allow time for this to occur.
SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS
Staff recommends awarding the Professional Services Agreement to Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC to conduct an
internal DEI Assessment.
REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Consulting Services Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Internal Assessment
Page 1 of 2
I�r
.r:►� Council Business Meeting
Attachment 2: Response to Request for Proposal prepared by Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC
Attachment 3: Scoring Sheet
Attachment 4: Paradigm Letter: Project Date
Attachment 6: Revised Scope of work with revised budget
Page 2 of 2
Irr
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
Consulting Services
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Internal Assessment
RFP 22-010
Issued: Friday, December 01, 2022
Response Deadline: 4:00 p.m. Friday, February 17, 2023
Last Day to Submit Questions: Monday, January 16, 2023
Responses to all questions will be posted here www.ashland.or.us/responses
(Questions must be submitted in writing to cheryl.artrip@ashland.or.us)
Submit to:
Administration Department
Office of the City Manager
City of Ashland
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
CONSULTING SERVICES FOR AN INTERNAL ASSESSMENT
FOR DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION
PWA
,74 MCI
CITY OF
-ASH LAN D
ppro as to form:
Doug as M McGeary, Acting City Attorney
City of Ashland, Oregon Administration
541-488-6002 or www.ashland.or.us
Project Overview
The City of Ashland requests proposals from experienced consultants to assess the internal
operations of the organization through the lens of diversity, equity, and inclusion.
The Request for Proposal may be obtained:
• Through www.oregonbuys.gov
• City of Ashland website: www.ashland.or.us
• Via Email: administration(i ,ashland.or.us
Proposals must be received by 4:00 p.m. PST on Friday, February 17.2023. Sealed paper
proposals must be marked in the lower left corner on the envelope "RFP 22-010 CMO, DEI
Assessment" and submitted to Cheryl Artrip, Administrative Assistance, City Hall, 20 East Main
Street, Ashland Or 97520. Please include the signed original and three copies. Email and
Facsimile proposals are not acceptable.
Proposers responding to this RFP must follow the procedures and requirements stated within this
RFP. Adherence to these procedures and requirement will ensure a fair and objective analysis of
the proposals submitted. Failure to comply with or complete any part of this RFP may result in
rejection of the submitted proposal.
The assessment will be administered by the Deputy City Manager's Office.
Scope of Work
• Conduct an analysis and develop a baseline assessment report of the City of Ashland's
current organizational practices and level of DEI awareness and competency to fully
appreciate the contribution of all staff and to identify priorities to further strengthen DEI
capacity to shape and execute the City's operations.
• Develop the City's long-term DEI strategy and prioritize recommendations in the areas
for hiring practices, procurement procedures and programming/services offered.
• Identify and incorporate qualitative and quantitative performance metrics and data to
gauge DEI initiatives.
• Identify steps the City of Ashland could take to build trust and meaningful engagement
with historically underrepresented and marginalized groups, as well as community
partners.
2
City of Ashland, Oregon Administration
541-488-6002 or www.ashland.or.us
• Provide insight and knowledge on DEI best practices with a focus on government
agencies.
• Develop a training strategy to increase staff DEI competencies, skills and capacity.
• Increase awareness, address disparities, and promote equity and inclusion within City
funded programs.
Desired Deliverables
An internal report assessing the current state of our organization's access, diversity equity and
inclusion practices and culture.
A strategic plan that illustrates clear and actionable steps for internal strategies to address
diversity, equity, and inclusion. The Plan should include:
• Assessment of hiring procedures, policies, and promotions. Recommend tools
that support access, diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies, such as recruiting
and staffing software that assists with unbiased selection and recruitment
processes. All suggested actions must comply with State and Federal Law.
• Framework for continued culture changes for long-term sustainability of access,
diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies.
• Framework for vendor selection that incorporates diversity, equity and inclusion
best practices. Update vendor policies to align with best practices and identify
reporting and monitoring processes.
Evaluation Process
1. Scoring Criteria
Scoring will be based upon the following described categories. The proposer must describe how
each of the requirements specified in this RFP are met. Responses should be clear and concise.
1.1 Understandingof f Requested Quote Maximum Score 10 points
Demonstrate a clear and concise understanding of the scope of services being requested in
this RFQ.
1.2 Proposer's Capabilities Maximum Score 20 points
Demonstrate capability to complete the requested services. Response must include:
City of Ashland, Oregon Administration
541-488-6002 or www.ashland.or.us
• (10 points) An explanation describing how the proposer can accommodate the
varying workload contemplated under the contract, including a description of
anticipated response times throughout the proposed project timeline and task
assignment/schedule.
• (10 points) An explanation describing proposer's proximity to the project and how the
proposer can cost effectively accommodate working on this project. If applicable,
describe proposers branch or satellite offices that will project the requested services,
indicate their locations(s) and which services they are able to perform.
1.3 Project Team and Qualification Maximum Score 25 points
• (5 points) Describe the extent of principal involvement, and how you incorporate
diversity, equity and inclusion practices.
• (10 points) Include descriptions of three or more relevant projects. Include project
outcomes, team members and references.
• (10 points) Describe the experience and qualifications of proposed project
manager(s), and provide information regarding key staff members who are
anticipated to perform services.
1.4 Resources Maximum Score 20 points
Demonstrate proposer's resources available to be allocated for the proposed scope of
services. Describe any staffing or technology specialties or unique strengths that relate to the
services requested in this RFP. Include a brief description of new or innovative technologies
to be used.
1.5 Response Time Maximum Score 15 points
These criteria relate to how quickly the consultant can begin (contract signing) and complete
(final document delivery and formal final presentation) the project. The consultant must
demonstrate how time will be managed.
1.6 Cost of Services
Maximum Score 10 points
• Professional, technical, other professional rates
• Estimated billable hours by major project element
• Direct non -labor costs that might be applicable;
• All license and services costs are complete and fully contained in the quoted
price.
4
City of Ashland, Oregon Administration
541-488-6002 or www.ashland.or.us
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
Criteria
Maximum Score
Understanding of Requested Services
10
Proposer's Capabilities
20
Project Team and Qualifications
25
Resources
20
Response Time
15
Cost of Services
10
TOTAL 100 Points
After the proposals are reviewed, additional information may be requested for final evaluation.
The City of Ashland reserves the right to cancel this RFP at its sole discretion.
Additional Information
The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals not in compliance with all prescribed
public bidding procedures and requirements and may reject, for good cause, any and all
proposals upon the finding that it is in the public interest to do so.
The City's programs, services and activities are open to all persons without regard to race,
gender, age, handicap, religion, ethnic background, sexual orientation, or national origin.
A proposal may be withdrawn at any time before the proposal deadline, by providing a written
request for the withdrawal of the proposal to the issuing office. A duly authorized representative
of the firm shall execute the request. Withdrawal of a proposal will not prejudice the right of the
proposer to file a new proposal.
5
City of Ashland, Oregon Administration
541-488-6002 or www.ashland.or.us
City of Ashland, Oregon
Response to Request for Proposals
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Internal
Assessment
Prepared by Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC
14 February 2023
PARADIGM
�POBLICAFFAIRS
PARADIGM
U,PPUBLIC AFFAIRS
14 February 2023
Joseph Lessard
City Manager
City of Ashland
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Mr. Lessard and Members of the Selection Committee,
Paradigm Public Affairs appreciates the opportunity to present the City of Ashland with our
proposal in response to your RFP for a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Assessment. We were
drawn to your RFP for a number of reasons.
• Through an ordinance approved by City Council, the City of Ashland has created the
Social Equity and Racial Justice Commission (SERJ). This signals to us that the City has
leadership and community support to advance efforts within City government that
promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.
• We recently completed a project in Jackson County for another municipality and we
come prepared for this engagement with knowledge of the region, unique cultural
attributes, and knowledge of community partners.
• Your RFP document identifies the development of performance metrics as a project
deliverable to gauge DEI success. This suggests to us that you are interested in
identifying meaningful impact and avoiding performative allyship.
• Finally, we really like working in Oregon. This year Paradigm made a strategic decision
to focus work on our firm's home state of Colorado and the Pacific Northwest (PNW).
For projects in Oregon and Washington, we have a team member who resides in the
PNW, Dr. Matt Jones. Dr. Jones, who up in Jackson County, can offer historical and
cultural context. Apart from being convenient for you, this means that we can help
you when you need it and on your terms. Our Denver based team members can fly
direct from Denver to Medford, so being on site easily achievable.
Every once in a while, we see a project where our unique perspective and experience aligns
with a client, and we see that opportunity with the City of Ashland.
Let me tell you a bit more about who we are and why we're different from other firms. First
and foremost, we are a firm that helps and supports local government. Paradigm Public
Affairs is a woman owned small business in the Denver Metropolitan area. We were
established in 2018 and since that time we've served local governments around the country
in providing consultancy related to equity and inclusion, strengthening the relationships
between government and the communities they serve, public policy review, and
organizational development. We're different from other firms because working with state
and local governments is not a practice area for us - it is exclusively what we do.
WNe are advocates and allies for local governments and we distinguish ourselves from other
firms in important ways:
• Each member of our consulting team has practical experience in local government.
• We make every effort to match a team lead with the geographic region of each
client, so we retain value in understanding the culture, dynamics, and political
structure of the clients we serve.
• Each team member holds advanced credentials in local and/or state government,
including team members with doctorate education and practice in law, policy, and
public administration.
• Our services include up to 1 year of consultancy maintenance at no cost. There's
nothing more frustrating that feeling that you've been left with an assessment with
recommendations and findings yet you still have questions and need guidance.
Our services typically include up to 1 year (24 hours) of follow-up consultancy after
the engagement closes so clients have access to team resources and guidance
after our time together ends.
We take great pride in our approach to working with local governments that includes
adaptive consultancy with results that are co -produced with our clients, including creating
educational content and delivery. We bring significant, practical experience in local
government leadership and service, and if you ask any of our consultants, we'll tell you that
we believe we are public servants, even though we now work for a private firm. Through this
approach and mindset, you achieve results that are unique and relevant to the City of
Ashland and the people, communities, and neighborhoods you serve. We are critical in our
assessments, but in a way that is designed to help you see new opportunities and a vision for
the future. When we design training and professional development, we work from the
perspective of adult learning and an understanding and respect for people who are public
servants in a variety of disciplines and programmatic areas.
Paradigm Public Affairs is uniquely positioned to support the City of Ashland in meeting your
expectations and needs:
Experience and Our consultants as are diverse as the clients we serve and the
Diversity in Thought future our clients envision for their communities. We emphasize
Leadership thought leadership in our work with clients by contributing to new
and different theories, applications, and evidence -informed
decision making.
Consultants with
experience in local
government
Our practice is comprised of consultants who have served in
various government capacities throughout the nation. We bring
a diverse skillset including experience in policy and program
evaluation, leadership, public safety, public health, and planning
and development, and a variety of other fields. We bring
expertise in government beyond human resources, so you're
positioned for a "Whole Community" strategy to assessment and
training.
Experience in
organizational culture
assessment and the
creation of practical
strategic planning
and implementation
guidance.
Our typical strategies for assessment means collecting qualitative
and quantitative data that become a baseline, or point in time,
measure for DEI success. Our process is to understand your
current state, look to the future to where you want to be, and
then construct an implementation strategy to bridge the gap
between the two. In the design of implementation strategies, we
rely heavily on the concept of Targeted Universalism, the same
strategy used by the State of Oregon.
This document outlines our proposed strategy for this important project. We encourage you
to view this plan as a menu so you can make decisions about phased investment and select
the process that works best for the City of Ashland. We look forward to learning about the
next steps in the selection process. This letter and included proposal serve as an offer for
services and is valid for 180 days. If we are fortunate enough to earn your trust for this project,
I will serve as the principle contact for contracting, but my colleague Matt Jones who is
based in the Portland area will serve as the local contact and project lead for you.
Sincerely,
Tanya Settles, Ph.D.
Chief Executive Officer
Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC
tanyasettles@paradigmpublicaffairs.com
303.887.1608
Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC is a full -service public sector management and leadership
consulting firm established in 2018. Our specialty areas of practice include diversity, equity,
and inclusion (DEI) and law enforcement consultancy. We are committed to providing
customized strategic solutions, with sustainable, measurable results, to address the specific
needs of an organizations culture. We are a woman owned business in the State of
Colorado and our staff is comprised of over 15 consultants, researchers, designers, facilitators
and more, located in the Denver area and across the United States.
Within the past several years, interest in how government entities create efficient, safe,
community -centric approaches to challenges has significantly increased. We approach this
work very differently from our competitors who tend to focus on rote assessments of
management, policies, and procedures that ends with a set of recommendations and no
direction on how to implement the findings or education programs that are not customized
or specific to the client. Our approach is different, and our focus is on working with our clients
as partners to identify unique challenges and areas of need. We use empirical evidence,
published research and notable best practices, to work with and guide our clients to value
differences while enhancing government performance and community collaboration
through the co -production of results.
We believe governments can improve performance, strengthen their relationship with the
community, and produce superior results by implementing transformational organizational
change. Every part of the process is developed through collaboration with our clients with
our role as one of helping each client to achieve their intended results, including content
customization and development in education programs. We are attentive to your unique
needs and circumstances, and every step of our process is customized to your needs
including survey instrumentation, facilitation of discussion sessions with stakeholders,
education development and delivery, and organizational culture assessments. Our
approach is based on our extensive practical experience in government and each
consultant and associate holds advanced academic credentials. We work closely with our
clients to ensure key stakeholder voices are included in a very collaborative process.
Name Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC
Address: 11757 W. Ken Caryl Ave., Ste. F-315
Littleton, CO 80127
Website: _ paradigm public affairs.com
Office Number 720.775.1171
General Email info@paradigmpublicaffairs.co
Primary Contact for this Project Tanya Settles
Chief Executive Officer
tanyasettles@paradigmpublicaffairs.com
303.887.1608
The mission of Paradigm Public Affairs is to help and support local government entities in
building respectful, peaceful, and inclusive policies and processes to bridge the gap
between government and the multifaceted communities they serve.
We envision sustainable, effective governments where employees and leaders are agents
of change and boundless capability; governments work in tandem with communities to
achieve effective, equitable, and transparent partnerships; and a world where
government is shared, participatory, and hinges on collaborative relationships with
communities.
Our Core Values
Leadership is shared and -requires community collaboration to achieve success.
Strategic and equitable partnerships are the basis of reciprocal and sustainable vision.
Better decisions are made with evidence and data.
Equity is a shared responsibility between government and communities.
Success is a strategic decision.
Every government is different, and no two local governments are alike. We recognize and
embrace the complexity of government and the unique attributes of every local
government we serve. At Paradigm Public Affairs, we are process consultants. We listen to
you with genuine curiosity, we learn from you, and approach work from the perspective that
we are your partners in designing solutions. This means that we work collaboratively with
each client to gain deep understanding about needs, culture, values, and goals for the
future. Through this partnership, we identify challenges and barriers, and we develop
solutions with you so that when we leave our time together, you have the tools you need to
continue work independent of consultancy support. Our goal is to appreciate the
difference between the organization you are now compared to what you envision for the
future.
Added Value Statement
Our team brings a unique mix of skills, perspectives, experiences, and diversity to the forefront
of our work with clients. We are different because:
We each have worked professionally in local government in different areas and
programs ranging from social services, public health, law enforcement, program and
policy evaluation, public works, and parks and recreation (among many others).
Each member of our team holds advanced credentials in public policy, public
administration, public affairs, or related disciplines.
We are diverse in unique ways ranging from race, identity, gender, and multiple
dimensions of intersectionality.
• Each of us has a background in higher education which means that we understand
the complexity of local government, and develop solutions that are accessible,
reachable, and sustainable to our clients.
• We only work with state and local government entities. We know our strengths, and
we are experts in local government.
• We are a small organization by design which gives us great flexibility and ability to
focus on a small handful of clients at one time. We have breadth and experience to
work with the smallest of local governments with under 100 employees to the largest
local governments in the nation with tens of thousands of employees.
• Several of our consultants and associates are "qualified" or "certified" administrators
for standardized diagnostics such as the Intercultural Development Inventory and the
EQi 2.0 series to assess emotional intelligence acuity. These tools can be incorporated
into the assessment process.
• We follow the "humble inquiry" approach to consulting. Our goal is to partner with
you, provide guidance where you need it, listen intently without judgement so we
learn from you, and yet do the heavy lifting so you can focus on the business of
government. When we leave our time together, our ultimate goal is that you have
the skills, knowledge, and capability to sustain DEI and organizational transformation
with limited, or entirely without, consultancy support in the future.
Pare 20 Project Team Overview
Each of the team members identified have decades of executive and high-level local
government experience, coupled with advanced training, and a dedication to supporting
state and local governments in creating realistic, sustainable, and strategically planned and
executed DEI initiatives. This practical experience is enhanced by many years of data
analysis, executive training and practice, and consulting experience. Our team is multi-
disciplinary meaning that each brings subject matter expertise in different aspects of
government services and operations. Additionally, because we believe the best decisions
are made from a position of evidence, each team member is trained in advanced research
methods, data acquisition, management, and analysis which gives the City of Ashland
assurance that we're the right team to help you develop performance metrics as needed
related to professional development.
The table below describes key responsibilities, role, and areas of subject matter expertise for
the team we currently envision for the City of Ashland. As we learn more about your needs,
we may adjust the team to meet those needs, or introduce other consultants to the project
if we learn that different areas of expertise are required for the successful completion of this
project.
Team Member
Expertise
Responsfbilitles
Tanya Settles, PhD
Restorative Justice '
Assessment Design and Execution
Client Partner
(Primary contact)
Community Capacity 'Education
Strategy,Design.& Facilitation
Building i
Coaching
l
Public Health.
Qualitative and Quantitative data analysis
i
Emergency ;
Qualified Administrator for the Intercultural
Management
i
Development Inventory.(f necessary)
Law Enforcement
Client Relationship
Matt Jones, PhD
Organizational
Assessment design and execution,
Consultant
Development
including analytic strategy
(Local contact)
Public Leadership
Education facilitation
Practice
Qualified Administrator for the EQi 2.0 (if
Executive Coaching
necessary)
Group Facilitation and
Education
Water Quality and
Watershed Protection
Public Health and Human
Services
Robert Rico, EdD
Restorative Justice :.:. ;
J Cultural Dialogue and Engagement
Consultant
Working with Adult `. ` .
,j Education Design and Facilitation
Learners
Education Design.,.-:-:
Community Capacity
Building
Focus Group Facilitation
Judith Fitzgerald, JD
Housing
Distance Education Design and Delivery
Consultant
Youth Advocacy
Legal review
Human Resources
Law & Policy
Dan Settles
Enterprise Resource
Information. Technology needs
Director of
Planning Systems (ERP)
Operations and
Data Extraction.
Client Relationships
, Government. IT Analytics.:.
> ...
Operations and Billing
Resource Management
:..
Business Analytics `:::.: .` ....:.......
Please see the following pages for short resumes for
each consultant team member. Full
curricula vitae are available upon request.
} • r
Judith is a tireless advocate for people
with disabilities, youth, and those who
have been socially disenfranchised by
the criminal justice system. Her legal
work has spanned multiple areas
including housing assistance, disability
advocacy, and family law. Beyond
her legal skill, Judith is a talented
educator with a focus on using
multiple strategies and technologies
to meet adult learners where they are
and move them toward the next level
of success.
Judith has held various leadership
roles in higher education, including
leadership of a large academic
program at Bowie State University.
She is a member of Alpha Kappa
Alpha sorority, the first Black -Greek
letter sorority in the United States.
CONTACT
PHONE:
443.802.6202
EMAIL:
judithlfitzgerald@yahoo.com
judith@paradigmpublicaffairs.com
P1-1
ARADIGM
PUBLIc AFFAIRS
JUDITH
FITZGERALD
Consultant
EDUCATION
Boston College Law School
Juhs Doctorate
Walden University
Master of Philosophy, Criminal Justice
Lincoln University
BS, Political Science
EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
Lecturer and course developer in NGO & Nonprofit Management
program at Johns Hopkins University
Former program director in Criminal Justice at Bowie State University.
Recipient of the 2013 Dream Keeper's Award for Mentorship (and
recognized on the Congressional Floor by Congressman
Ruppersberger)
Served as Senior Counsel to the Atlanta Housing Authority
Practicing attorney representing clients and litigated matters in criminal
defense, indigent prisoners referred by the US District Court on Criminal
Appeals before the US Court of Appeals, 41h Circuit, family law,
disability.
SKILLS
Strategic thinking, planning, restructuring in public and nonprofit
organizations
Program evaluation
Leadership coaching
Disability law
Teaching with technology
00001'�' PARADIGM
00
PUBLIC
"000
4
r _ MATTHEW JONES
PROFILE
Dr, Matthew Jones has been engaged
in public sector consulting for over 15
years. His passion is partnering with
organizations and individuals to
innovate and achieve high-level
performance. With a dedication to
helping organizations solve problems
and improve operations, he has served
as a consultant on small and large
projects that have included:
organizational assessments, DEI
development and sustainability,
leadership development programming
and training, research & analysis,
executive coaching, and meeting
facilitation.
Matt prides himself on his scientific
approach to consulting but is best
recognized for his human relations
skills in projects. Matt started work on
implicit bias in police organizations in
2005 and continues this work today.
His approach is to work alongside
clients integrating transformational
leadership, emotional intelligence,
and empathic thinking.
CONTACT
PHONE:
360.921.2321
EMAIL:
matt@nwemergent.com
EDUCATION
Portland State University
Doctor of Philosophy, Public Administration, emphasis Organizational
Development (2008)
Master of Public Administration (2004)
Norwich University
Bachelor of Arts, Criminal Justice (1996)
EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
Current Vice President for the Clark County, Washington Clean Water
Commission
President of the Board for the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnerships
Member, Clark County WA Law and Justice Council
Former Assistant Professor of Public Safety Management at the State University
of New York —Brockport
Former Assistant Professor and Program Manager for the Leadership in Public
Safety Programs at Portland State University
Former Chief of Police at Condon, Oregon
Author of numerous published articles on police administration and research
methods and design.
SKILLS
EQi-2.0 Certified (emotional intelligence)
Organizational Culture & Development
Facilitation
Quantitative and Qualitative Research Design and Execution
Performance Measurement and Metrics Development
Executive Coaching
10
PROFILE
Dr. Rico is the Director of Restorative
Justice at the Office of Inclusive
Excellence at the University of Texas at
San Antonio. Prior to this work, Robert
served as a lecturer in the College of
Public Policy, Department of
Criminology and Criminal Justice at
the some institution. Dr. Rico was the
founder and program coordinator of
the Restorative Justice Program of
Kendall County and spearheaded
and was a field consultant for a pilot
project at Edward White Middle
School in San Antonio. Dr. Rico also
served as a police officer for 20 years
and attended the Bill Blackwood Law
Enforcement Management Institute of
Texas and Leadership Command
College at Sam Houston State
University
PARADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
EDUCATION
University of Texas at Austin
Ed.D. Higher Education Leadership (2022)
University of Texas at San Antonio
Master of Public Administration (2004)
Bachelor of Arts, Criminal Justice (2001)
EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
Pioneer in restorative justice and inclusion in higher education
Public speaker and coach on inclusion in higher education
Served on the Big Brothers Big Sisters Juvenile Justice Council
Board of Directors for Kendall County (TX) Child Services
Published author and thought leader in restorative justice and inclusion
in public safety.
SKILLS
Education and curriculum design for adult learners
Community capacity building
Qualitative data analysis
Community forum facilitation
Language fluency in Spanish
IF
PROFILE
Dr. Settles is the founder and Chief
Executive Officer of Paradigm Public
Affairs, LLC. Tanya and her team have
partnered with local governments across
the United States toward a path of
community partnership, unity, and
enhanced government performance.
Tanya supports local governments
through a focus on community capacity
building, leadership, and professional
development that leverages diversity,
equity, and inclusion to achieve, build,
and sustain high performance
governments where employees and
community members, alike, are invested
and welcome.
Tanya has held various leadership state
and local government, primarily in the
areas of public safety, public health
equity, higher education, and policy and
program evaluation. Dr. Settles' current
work focuses on race and community
relations, restorative justice, diversity
and inclusion in public safety and
education, and the impacts of natural
and human caused disasters on at -risk
and diverse populations.
CONTACT
PHONE:
303,887,1608
EMAIL:
tanyosettles@porodigmpublicaffairs.com
TANYA SETTLES
EDUCATION
University of Colorado at Denver
Doctor of Philosophy, Public Affairs (2001)
Master of Public Administration (1996)
Metropolitan State University of Denver
Bachelor of Science, Criminology and Criminal Justice (1995)
EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
Former Associate Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Texas
at San Antonio
Appointed as a subject matter expert In low enforcement education to
the Colorado Peace Officers Standards and Training Board
Published author and thought leader in diversity, equity, and inclusion,
community and restorative justice, public ethics, and emergency
management
Served as the Director of Faculty for Colorado State University Global
Campus
Served as the Director of Strategic and Tactical Planning for the Denver
Police Department
Subject Matter Expert to the Columbine Commission
Former Managing Auditor for the Office of the Colorado State Auditor
SKILLS
Advanced analytics, including statistical modeling and analysis
Quantitative and qualitative research design and execution
Education program and curriculum design, including machine
language ability (Python) and HTMLX programming
Community capacity building
12
We envision 6 months to deliver this project, though accommodations can be made
based on need and budget. A minimum of 4 consultants will be required to deliver all
project deliverables. We respect the boundaries of budget and time, so to optimize both,
you may only see 2 consultants on site with the other team members working remotely. We
currently have the resources and staff time available to begin this project as early as
March 1 with project completion by August 31, 2023, In determining staffing, we prefer to
schedule engagements so that no team member is working on more than 3 projects at any
given time. At this time, we confirm we have consultant availability and resources
necessary to complete this project based on the following timeline and proposed
workplan. In the interest of transparency, some members of this team are in the process of
wrapping up one engagement, with a second project currently underway.
Preliminary Project Schedule
Build Trust with Leaders and
Staff
Conduct Culture and
Belonging Assessment
Human Resources and
People Management
Review
Analysis of Vendor
Selection and Procurement
Processes
Design Implementation
Strategy (Targeted
Universalism)
Design 18-month Strategic
Plan
Project Closure
13
Part 3: Qualifications, Experience, and Capabilities
Paradigm Public Affairs has had the privilege of working with a variety of local government
entities across the United States to address challenges and needs related to inclusive
governance, efficiency, and government effectiveness through enhancing organizational
culture and diversity, equity, and inclusion. We've worked with some of the largest local
governments in the nation, and some of the smallest. Every municipal and regional
government needs and deserves solutions that are unique to them and their circumstances.
The figure below shows some former and current clients we've worked with over the past
several years. For these clients, we've provided services ranging from process consultancy
to organizational assessments, education and professional development, facilitation of
community engagement processes, and community capacity building.
Z!
LINGTON HEIGHTS
r---------- Illinois —�-
FOREST T., PRESERVES
of Cook County
��;�•:3 otyd
edgewater
Nose'
t Y e•l 1
al0
.rsyl is :• 1phQ�`
Oregon19
city of Medford,
College of e s
�COOK COUNTY MEMRS
Racine Couniy
itcyitifv
Betmen 2018 and 2022, Paradigm PuWic Affairs and The Kaleidoscope Group entered Into a strategic alliance partnership to develop DEt consultanry, around the needs of government, public safety, and law
enforcement cle ms. Some of the dknts on this list Include those served as part of this partnership where Paradigm Public Affairs either fully or subsiaWally delivered services to clients.
Recent Examples of DEI Projects and Success
2022/3: City of Edgewater, Colorado. We recently completed an assessment of
organizational culture, welcomeness, and belonging within Edgewater City government.
Edgewater is a unique city that is geographically small, with a correspondingly small
population size (under 6,000 residents, overall), but with the challenges and opportunities of
a large municipal government because of geographic situation in the Denver metropolitan
area. Our work for this assessment focused on determining a baseline assessment of
belonging and inclusion within the workforce, offering recommendations for sustainable
government administration that may include organizational restructuring, resolution of
isolated incidents of organizational trauma related to DEI and belonging, and construction
14
of an implementation roadmap to put a measurable, performance -based plan into place
over an 18-month time horizon.
2022: City of Medford, Oregon. This project had 2 prongs -- first was a limited scope
assessment of organizational readiness and flexibility related to diversity, inclusion, and
access for employees in terms of HR practices, management, and service delivery. The
second prong was a fairly deep dive into housing instability, houselessness, and equity in
service delivery that included the Housing and Development Department, Police
Department, relationships with private service providers, and intergovernmental agreements
with state, local, and federal funding and oversight sources. One of the most notable
findings associated with this study was identification of the City's challenges in
acknowledging the needs of the Latino/a/X population in the city both in terms of valuing
and leveraging diversity within City government and in service provision and outreach to the
community.
2021 -2023: Town of Mooresville, North Carolina. Our team has been working with the Town
of Mooresville since the spring of 2021 when we provided DEI education and ongoing
consultancy and support to their ERG, the Diversity Advisory Committee. We will continue
this work throughout the remainder of 2022 through a comprehensive organizational culture
assessment that includes qualitative and quantitative data collection components and use
of more advanced analytical strategies to identify opportunities for improvement from
baseline measurement (we're using exploratory factor analysis). Recent work in Mooresville
has included developing training and professional development on strategies to practice
allyship in government work.
2021-2022: Metro Nashville Government. Paradigm, in partnership with the Kaleidoscope
Group, designed 2, 4-hour professional development/education programs for county and
city government individual contributors and leaders about understanding and managing
bias, engaging in inclusive and respectful behaviors, and challenging conversations. Leader
education focuses on performance and people management strategies; individual
contributor education focuses on understanding and managing bias and techniques to
engage in respectful and inclusive behaviors both internally and in delivering services to an
incredibly diverse and robust community.
2021: Village of Arlington Weights, Illinois. We conducted a limited scope organizational
assessment that included a customized survey deployment to look at employee perceptions
of diversity and inclusion, Human Resources and talent management policy and process
review, and facilitation of a series of community listening sessions and moderating a Town
Hall between community members and the Mayor and Town Manager. These community
engagement sessions were conducted in the midst of the Co-VID epidemic, and therefore
were facilitated virtually. Ideally, at least half of these sessions would have been conducted
in person, but public health concerns were significant at the time of delivery.
2021: Government of Racine County, Wisconsin. For Racine County government, we
conducted leadership visioning and alignment sessions, delivered the EQ12.0 for leaders (with
a group debriefing), and designed and delivered education programs for managers and
individual contributors across the entire county government.
15
References
Tiffany Shelley Bonnie Barasch Jocelyn Mills Mary Rath
Director of Human
Director of Human
Deputy City
Director of Human
Resources
Resources
Manager,
Resources
Director of
Community
Development
413 N Main Street
411 W. 81h St.
1800 Harlan
33 S Arlington Heights
Mooresville, NC
Medford, OR
Street
Rd.
28115
97501
Edgewater, CO
Arlington Heights, IL
704.799.4027
60005
312-692-3326
tshelley@mooresvill bonnie.barasch@ jmills@edgewater mary.rath@vah.com
enc gov cityofinedford.org co.com
Client Partner since Client partner Client partner Client Partner since
2021 since 2021 since 2022 2019
Tailored design
education
programs for all
employees,
leaders, and law
enforcement
Consultancy
support and
guidance to the
internal Diversity
Advisory
Committee
2022 work
underway including
organizational
culture and
belonging
assessment within
Town government.
Limited Scope DEI
Organizational
assessment
Assessment of
housing/houseless
ness with DEI lens
Policy review and
assessment of
Community
Development
Block Grant
award process
Assessment of
community
partner
relationships in
response to
houselessness and
housing insecurity
Culture and
Belonging
organizational
assessment
Human
Resources policy
review
Consultancy
support to the
DEEI Staff team
Development of
implementation
strategy with
performance
benchmarks
16
Conducted
organization wide
assessment
Engaged in
community outreach
and facilitated
community listening
sessions
Designed tailored
strategic planning
template for the
Village
See
httos://www,vah.com
/your government/di
versitv eauity _ inclu-
sion for a copy of the
report.
Part 4: Project Understanding and Approach
Within the past several years, interest in how government entities create efficient, safe,
community -centric approaches to governance where diversity, equity, inclusion, and
belonging is a central focus has significantly increased. Our approach is different because
we work with our clients as partners to identify unique challenges and areas of need
through a methodologically sound assessment process that may include adhering to
Yellow Book standards when needed. We take what we learn from the assessment to
create highly customized professional development and training that is unique to your
needs and circumstances.
0
We use empirical evidence,
published research, and notable
best practices to work with and
guide our clients to value
differences and enhance
government performance.
Y " RN ` A key differentiating factor from
l
h, .q=:�,.,f:,,, �.>,• 5 our competitors is that our
Engagc alldservices often include the
gv,c�►s development of relevant
r�rx to Co-Pioduceimplementation roadmaps when
%.Results
r R findings and recommendations
call for policy change. In these
cases, we often recommend an
approach based on targeted
universalism for policy
development because it allows government entities to look at equity and equality at the
same time yet recognizes differences between the two. For local governments in Oregon,
this is important, as the State of Oregon has adopted Targeted Universalism as a preferred
policy structure so your approach may align with potential funding opportunities and
resources.
Suildng trust means
culture of your go
relationships, ar
needs and goal!
trust, we are better
adaptive and flexib
the outcomes you neeu.
17
eve governments can improve
iance, strengthen relationsNps,
)duce superior results though
rmational policies and
ational change.
Our goal Is to create a path between
your current state and your vision for
the future. Our process Is Inclusive of
multiple voices and perspectives and
recommendations are based on a
variety of data col'ection strategss so
all stakeholders have a voice In the
process.
Our process for this project follows a 6-month engagement and the timeline presented in
Part 3 of this proposal. Our approach for DEI work blends best practices with key
touchpoints of the public policy process. This blended model supports bringing assessment
findings and education and fraining together as a matter of strategy. Our Blended DEI
Development Cycle includes 7 points of interaction and engagement. To support
incremental and strategically planned improvement, the process is cyclical so that clients
can track success, make process and goal changes when needed, and continually evolve
and adjust to changing internal and external factors.
Blended Government DEI/Organizational Development
Because this model is cyclical, steps do not need to occur in a particular sequence.
However, for the City of Ashland we recognize that your immediate needs are an
organizational assessment, review of human resources and people management policies,
design of an implementation strategy, and strategic planning.
Peter Drucker once said, "culture eats strategy for breakfast". This means that no matter
how strong the assessment, strategy, or implementation plan is, if they don't fit within the
organizational culture of the organization, the risk of failure is great. For that reason, part of
our process includes taking time to understand the organizational culture of the City of
Ashland within the context of organizational culture and belonging and professional
development content and delivery. Our approach to understanding organizational
culture and assessment is based on Edgar Schein's 3-layer model of organizational culture
adapted to uncover, identify, and provide solutions to challenges and barriers to inclusion
in governance.
18
Goals
Values
PARADIGM
,...PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Behaviors, Actions,
Structure
Bell efs, Aspirations, Goals of
Government
Things We Take for Granted
Implicit Biases and
Preferences
Our recommendation for this project is to begin by looking at organizational culture to gain
insight about how City government works, the degree to which you support a welcoming
work environment, and what that means for service delivery to the community. This
process involves looking at organizational culture by first examining the surface that
includes the behaviors, practices, and structure of government. In other words, we look at
those things that are seen by people, organizations, and partners that interact with the City
of Ashland. Then we look deeper into the values and goals of City government to better
understand what drives the organization and how DEI may (or may not) fit into those
values. Finally, at the deepest level, we look for the things that are taken for granted. It is
at this very deep level that unconscious bias exists that may impact how policies &
procedures are structured and how staff interact with the community in the execution of
those policies. When we encounter inequity, it is typically at this deeper level.
We envision 3 key parts to this project; first, a culture and belonging assessment, second
the design of an implementation strategy that may be inspired by Targeted Universalism,
and last, an 18-month strategic plan. Most work for the assessment will be conducted off
site, though there are key points, such as focus groups, some interviews, and other events
where we will need to have team -members on -site in Ashland. If we are fortunate enough
to earn your trust, we will work together - with you - to develop a site -visit schedule that fits
your needs when we finalize the scope of this project.
Culture and Belonging Assessment Approach
Our proposed process for baseline EDI assessment for the City of Ashland follows these
general steps:
19
1. Engagement launch and conduct project information sessions to dispel myths and
encourage participation throughout Ashland government. We recommend
conducting information sessions with Department directors and leaders first, followed
by general sessions with staff and employees. These sessions may be in -person,
virtual, hybrid, or any combination that meets the needs of your workforce.
2. Conduct a high-level organizational review of documents, policies, and processes
that support government. This step provides initial insight as to how the City is
structured, operates, and gives us insight about areas of opportunity where DEI may
improve overall performance.
3. Conduct focus groups and individual interviews and analyze data. This step involves
engaging with employees and leaders to understand where the greatest
opportunities are DEI needs and improvement, and gain insight as to how DEI
objectives dovetail with organizational culture. In our experience, we gain deep
understanding and knowledge through direct communication and engagement
with staff. Qualitative data from focus groups and interviews is also used to tailor a
survey to the unique needs and opportunities in City of Ashland government. In
some cases, for various reasons, we're not able to connect with as many staff and
employees as we'd like. When this occurs, we recommend facilitating listening
sessions so all employees have an opportunity to engage in the project and claim
ownership of the end result.
.4. Collect and analyze quantitative data. Quantitative data may come from data the
City of Ashland already holds (such as data from Human Resources Information
Systems) or from a survey we customize and deploy specific to this project. Surveys
are delivered electronically, can be translated into various languages as needed,
and are optimized for mobile devices. Typical analysis includes descriptive statistics
and cross -tabulations to look for significant differences and statistical relationships
between elements of diversity (such as race/ethnicity, age, ability/disability, and
gender among others) and behaviors and perceptions within government. The need
for higher level analytics will be a decision we make together. As an example, we
recently used an exploratory factor analysis strategy coupled with a regression
analysis technique to identify the key drivers of diversity, equity, inclusion, and
organizational culture that are unique to that organization.
20
Data Analysis process
111. •'
Data Collection Data Cleaning Data Analysis Data Understanding Data Visualizations Data Verification
Collect primary
Ensure all data
Ulitati
Understand the
Prepare visual
Verify
(data we collect
points and items
qualitative
context of data
reports that may
visualizations
client to
and generate
collected have
(thematic
and verify with
Include
with
confirm
through
Interviews, focus
value and are
methodologically
analysis
they add value
to the analysis
dashboards
explanatory
groups, and
appropriate ppropriate
procedure) and
quantitative
value
survey
methods to
deployment) and
analyze all data
secondary data
(data you
provide)
5. Develop findings & recommendations and construct report. Our reporting tends to first
highlight those practices and policies that support inclusion and equity within a
government, then look at opportunities to enhance the foundation already in place.
Reports tend to include identification of challenges with solutions that are customized
to each client as well as exploring opportunities for the future.
6. Design implementation roadmap. We see implementation planning as a separate
deliverable from the assessment report. Guidance on implementation of findings and
recommendations will help keep the momentum going and identify ways for team
collaboration in implementation strategies. Findings and recommendations from the
assessment are used as the foundation for a unique implementation roadmap that
covers 6 to 18 months and includes metrics and measures for incremental and steady
improvement. In our experience, a time horizon of more than 18 months increases the
risk of non -completion. Additionally, since our services include up to 1 year (24 hours)
of follow-up consultancy, you have the support you need to implement the strategy
we design to improve DEI outcomes in the future.
7. Design strategic plan. The Implementation Roadmap may be considered part of the
strategic planning document. In addition to designing a roadmap to help guide the
City of Ashland through addressing findings and recommendations, we will also design
a strategic plan and framework for the City of Ashland that includes identification of
strategic areas of focus, goals for each of those strategic areas, measures and metrics
for each goal that defines how you will measure success. We also recommend
including in the strategic framework identification of keys that support sustainable
change related to communication strategies, accountability for key stakeholders and
groups, and education as needed. The strategic plan will be delivered as a report
with a written narrative, and then consolidated into an infographic for distribution
throughout the workforce.
9
Proposed Workplan and Scope of Work
This workplan represents our current understanding of the City of Ashland's immediate needs
We encourage you to view our proposed workplan as a menu. Each of these items can be
scaled up, scaled down, or modified to meet unique circumstances. The schedule/timeline
corresponds with an overall 6-month engagement and follows a structured and phased
approach to activities and deliverables.
Project Launch
1. Paradigm to conduct 60 min. kick-off meeting with
keyatakeholders (may be conducted virtually).
2 Pt' Migm to request organizational documents
related to policy and operations throughout the
City and information about partnerwith
ov4crrrvl-n�roL�h �IrJorc:
Month 1
Phase 1: 1. Conduct an information session with Executives, Months
Building Trust Leaders, and individual contributors to introduce 1-2
the project and team, answer questions, and
dispel myths about DEI.
2, Hold 1:1 conversations with leaders to gain insight
about vision for assessment and education goals.
Phase 2Conduct
Culture and
Belonging
Assessment
1. Qualitc ive data dollection (may include' 1:1
interviews, focus groups, listening sessions).
Collection and analysis of existing quantitative
data from previous surveys and other data
collectioraefforts related to organizational culture
and warkl`orce engagement.
anths
4
7. Culture and Belonging Assessment delive
Phase 3: Design 1. Prioritize recommendations based on urgency, risk, Months
Implementation and ease of execution 4-5
Strategy to 2. Categorize recommendations into goals, develop
Complement overarching performance measures for each goal.
Assessment 3. Design/develop implementation steps for each
Recommendations goal.
and Finding
22
4. Gain feedback from client as to content,
adjust/modify content as needed.
Phase 4: Develop
5. Couct SWOT analysis
Months
6, Based on assessment results, identify core goals
5-6
I1n
and values associated with belonging, culture,
and DEI
'
7. Articulate action plans for core goals,
$. Incotporate incremental measurement and
,. rnefirics `points forProcess improvement.
;.._ . .
Phase 5: Project
9. Consolidate all deliverables into a single
Months
Closure
document
6
10. Conduct final presentations as needed to
leadership and elected officials (may be virtual or
on site
This timeline and schedule for deliverables is based on the following assumptions:
➢ The Paradigm team will have access to relevant City of Ashland staff and
leadership.
➢ The City of Ashland will assist our team in determining appropriate internal and
external stakeholders for project tasks as needed.
➢ The City of Ashland will submit data and information, as needed, in a timely fashion.
➢ The City of Ashland will help promote opportunities for employee engagement as
part of this project.
Communication Strata
Co -production means maintaining and supporting open and transparent communication.
Early in the project or engagement, we recommend biweekly meetings to touch base with
key stakeholders that are virtual (e.g., Zoom) or in some cases in person. Our team member,
Matt Jones, will be your primary "in -person" contact with other team members attending
virtually. The exception is when we're on -site conducting assessment or education delivery
activities. Our firm is based in the Denver area, and team members are located across the
United States (Matt Jones is located in the Portland, Oregon area, Judith is in Baltimore,
Robert Rico is located in San Antonio, Texas). For complex engagements, we recommend
use of project management tools such as Gantt charts that are available to the client
through a Google Cloud. We also recommend at least quarterly written status reports to the
key client contact and/or Deputy City Manager.
If you decide to work with us, you will be provided with direct contact information for each
team member. Our policy is that email from clients are answered within 1 business day, text
messaging is welcome, as are direct phone calls. We'll work with you to schedule regular
meetings (typically virtual) for project updates and for purposes of co -production, and if
necessary, we'll create files in Google Workspace so you have access to project
management tools, working papers, and feedback on deliverables and activities,
23
Part 5: Investment Proposal
We encourage you to view our proposed workplan as a menu and each of these items can
be scaled up, scaled down, modified, or eliminated entirely to meet your needs. For Total
Cost, we used a rough estimate of 425 employees for purposes of estimating focus group
composition and survey results.
Paradigm Public Affairs does not charge for travel or supplemental fees (with some specific
exceptions such as administration of standardized assessments), so these costs reflect only
the time our team will be working on this project. Our fees are set at a fiat $275 per billable
hour for all services. We develop costs based on the following factors:
Our workplan narrative presented in the proposal.
Our staffing plan and resource allocation which provides the City with the
appropriate number of consultants and a level of expertise to complete the tasks
defined in the RFP.
Our experience conducting projects of similar size and scope.
Additional services not described in this proposal may result in a change in cost. Our all-
inclusive price to conduct this project as described in this proposal is $44,550. We understand
this estimate is slightly over the budget you've identified for this project. We welcome the
opportunity to discuss the scope of services with you and refine/revise as we better
understand your needs.
ACTIVITY HOURS
Project Launch and Information Sessions (1 for Leaders, 3 for Staff, may be 10
delivered virtually, on -site, or both)
High Level Organizational Review 16
Focus Groups, Individual Interviews (requires 2 days on site with 2 consultants), 40
Qualitative Data Analysis
Quantitative Data Collection, Survey Design/Deployment, Quantitative Data 30
Analysis
Develop Findings & Recommendations; Report Construction 30
Design Implementation Roadmap and Strategic Plan with Resource Needs and 20
Incremental Touchpoints for Measurement
Project Closure Including Presentations (may be virtual or in -person, TBD)1
TOTAL HOURS
HOURLY RATE
TOTAL PROFESSIONAL FEES
24
162
$275
$44,550
Paradiam Public Affairs Preferred Terms
Payment: Payment schedule for services described in this statement of work:
30% of Professional Fees will be billed and payable upon contract initiation
• The remaining professional fees and reimbursable expenses will be invoiced monthly
until the work plan budget is exhausted. (Travel and reimbursable expenses will be
invoiced as incurred and billed according to the client's policy or guidelines if
included in the cost proposal)
• All prices are guaranteed for twelve (12) months from the date of execution of the
contract
Reimbursements: Travel and out-of-pocket expenses (e.g., airfare, hotel, rental car, ground
transportation, parking, mileage, meals, etc.) are included in the agreed upon scope of work
as described. Additional requests from the client may result in additional costs that are billed
and payable as incurred..
Time for Work: If work is pre -billed and work is not completed within twelve months of date
of contract, the contract will expire, and any collected pre -billed funds will be forfeited.
Audio and Video Recording: Audio and/or video recording of Paradigm Public Affairs
content, consultants, and/or events at any client venue is prohibited unless written consent
is provided in advance by Paradigm Public Affairs. Additional fees may apply.
Cancellation of Work: If work is scheduled and cancelled within 15 business days prior to the
scheduled date by the Client, the charge will be 25 percent of the cost of the work. If work
is scheduled and cancelled within 10 business days of the scheduled date by the Client, the
charge will be 50 percent of the cost of the work, If a cancellation occurs, no cancellation
fees shall be due if Paradigm Public Affairs and the Client are able to mutually reschedule
the work within 30 days. If Paradigm Public Affairs cancels this agreement, Paradigm Public
Affairs will reimburse client any unexpended funds from the payments that have been
received to date towards pre -paid work.
Property Rights: Paradigm Public Affairs shall copyright the materials that it develops for use
with Client. All materials developed and used by Paradigm Public Affairs shall be the
exclusive property of Paradigm and the Client agrees that it will not disclose any materials
to a third party or use materials to conduct its own related services without the prior written
consent of Paradigm Public Affairs or is included in the final contract for services. Any
material specifically developed for client may be copied, distributed, and reviewed by any
employee of client without further charge.
Confidentiality: Paradigm Public Affairs shall regard as confidential and proprietary all client
"internal use" and "confidential" information communicated to it by the client in connection
with this work plan. Paradigm Public Affairs shall not, without client's prior written consent, at
any time use such information for purpose other than in connection with this work plan for
the benefit of the client.
25
Input total scores for
each submission Entity
Sabrina Ann
Tighe
Brandon Rachel
Total
Average score
Acorde Consulting LLC
68
63
45
49
50
275
55
BCG Learning Solutions
89
86
56
76
86
393
79
CCS Learning Academy
95
94
64
84
91
428
86
Field Therapy and Consultin
65
72
41
52
70
300
60
Gallagher
80
72 77
70
67
366
73
IMAN
95
81
67
80
81
404
81
Mattingly Solutions
40
26
53
36
68
223
45
NCXT
100
57
83
90
330
66
Paradigm Public Affairs
95
99
75
901
951
4541
91
Peace in Action
95
86
73
91
94
439
88
Racial Equity Group
1001
86
73
79
78
416
83
Racing to Equity-EQTYIA
95
95
65 92
91
438
88
Social Current
75
45
58
36
78
292
58
Territory North America
95
84
56
88
98
421
84
The Barthwell Group
90
92
75
91
82
430
86
The One Equity Group
55
81
58
43
85
322
64
The UNLEARNING Project
65 100
62
67
91
385
77
The Uprise Collective
78
87
46
69
82
362
72
Top Rank
88
76
50
57
67
338
68
0 0 NJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Acorde Consulting LLC
BCG Learning Solutions
CCS Learning Academy
Field Therapy and Consulting
Gallagher
I MAN
Mattingly Solutions
NCXT
a
fD Paradigm Public Affairs
0-q
rD Peace in Action
u7
n
(ODD Racial Equity Group
Racing to Equity-EQTYIA
Social Current
Territory North America
The Barthwell Group
The One Equity Group
The UNLEARNING Project
The Uprise Collective
Top Rank
= PARADIGM
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Ann Seltzer
City of Ashland
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Ann,
Thank you for spending some of your day with us on Monday. Matt and I both
enjoyed meeting you, and we're excited about this project. We put our heads
together, and I'd like to propose a solution that gives you the flexible scheduling
you need, reduces the overall cost of the project, supports the momentum
you've started for the year.
Based on what I understood from our conversation, here's what we propose:
1. Reduce the number of hours allocated to quantitative and qualitative
data collection and analysis, as well as hours for designing and
implementation strategy.
2. Set the target start date for the assessment project launch for September
1, 2023 with the caveat that if the City desires an earlier start, we will
accommodate to the best of our ability.
3. Between the time of contract execution and September 1, Paradigm will
conduct one on -site visit with the purpose of meeting with leadership to
inform them about the project process and goals and dispel myths about
DEI work in government. The purpose of this effort is to engage directors in
the process, earn their trust, and gain preliminary insight about goals and
objectives. During the same visit, we will conduct an open -house style
information session for staff to introduce Paradigm, dispel myths, and
engage with staff. For this visit, at least 2 Paradigm team members will
attend (likely Matt and Tanya, though we encourage the City to consider
remote access for other team members).
4. During the interim between contract execution and assessment launch,
Paradigm will begin our learning about the City limited to publicly
available information and no Ashland government staff support. For your
convenience, I'm attaching to this letter our standard document
discovery request that we'll formally send when we're ready to move
forward with an engagement kick-off meeting. This is for your
convenience only, and there are no expectations you respond to this list
prior to the assessment launch (but please feel free to send any
information you believe is important or relevant for us to know and as we
have time, we'll work off -contract to get up to speed so we can hit the
ground running when the time is right).
5. As you know, our services include up to 24 hours (2 hours per month) of
after -engagement maintenance. We propose shifting 8 of those hours to
pre -engagement consultancy so you and other staff have help when you
need it, on your terms, and you maintain support for the project that will
begin later this year. That way, when you need resources, we're here -
and if you don't, we'll move any hours we didn't expend back to
maintenance after the project closes.
6. Our preferred terms and conditions that were included in the proposal
identified 30 percent of professional fees payable upon contract
execution. Given the circumstances, I feel that since we won't become
fully engaged in the project for as much as 6 months, we're asking the
City to consider a 20 percent retainer ($7,975) to ensure we retain space
in our project production schedule for Ashland and to cover pre -
engagement costs associated with designing and delivering information
sessions prior to full project engagement/launch.
I'm including some documents with this letter for your that includes our revised
and preferred terms, a revised cost proposal for an overall investment by the
City of Ashland for $39,875 that includes a new column with an estimated
timeline, and a revised workplan table. There are 2 changes to the initially
proposed workplan:
1. 1 removed the assessment element that looked at equity in vendor
selection and procurement processes which narrowed the scope and
overall number of engagement hours.
2. 1 limited the focus of the SWOT analysis to assessment findings to narrow
the scope and number of engagement hours.
I hope we've captured the changes we discussed earlier this week. Of course, if
the City needs additional changes, we're always open to having a conversation
so we ensure that our processes align with your needs.
Warmly,
Tanya Settles, Ph.D.
Chief Executive Officer
Paradigm Public Affairs, LLC
Paradigm Public Affairs Preferred Terms for City of Ashland, OR
Payment: Payment schedule for services described in this statement of work:
20% of Professional Fees will be billed and payable upon contract initiation.
The remaining professional fees and reimbursable expenses will be invoiced
monthly until the work plan budget is exhausted.
All prices are guaranteed for twelve (12) months from the date of execution of the
contract
Reimbursements: Travel and out-of-pocket expenses (e.g., airfare, hotel, rental car,
ground transportation, parking, mileage, meals, etc.) are included in the agreed upon
scope of work as described. Additional requests from the client may result in additional
costs that are billed and payable as incurred.
Time for Work: If work is pre -billed and work is not completed within twelve months of
date of contract, the contract will expire, and any collected pre -billed funds will be
forfeited.
Audio and Video Recording: Audio and/or video recording of Paradigm Public Affairs
content, consultants, and/or events at any client venue is prohibited unless written
consent is provided in advance by Paradigm Public Affairs. Additional fees may apply.
Cancellation of Work: If work is scheduled and cancelled within 15 business days prior to
the scheduled date by the Client, the charge will be 25 percent of the cost of the work.
If work is scheduled and cancelled within 10 business days of the scheduled date by the
Client, the charge will be 50 percent of the cost of the work. If a cancellation occurs, no
cancellation fees shall be due if Paradigm Public Affairs and the Client are able to
mutually reschedule the work within 30 days. If Paradigm Public Affairs cancels this
agreement, Paradigm Public Affairs will reimburse client any unexpended funds from the
payments that have been received to date towards pre -paid work.
Property Rights: Paradigm Public Affairs shall copyright the materials that it develops for
use with Client. All materials developed and used by Paradigm Public Affairs shall be the
exclusive property of Paradigm and the Client agrees that it will not disclose any materials
to a third party or use materials to conduct its own related services without the prior
written consent of Paradigm Public Affairs or is included in the final contract for services.
Any material specifically developed for client may be copied, distributed, and reviewed
by any employee of client without further charge.
Confidentiality: Paradigm Public Affairs shall regard as confidential and proprietary all
client "internal use" and "confidential" information communicated to it by the client in
connection with this work plan. Paradigm Public Affairs shall not, without client's prior
written consent, at any time use such information for purpose other than in connection
with this work plan for the benefit of the client.
Revised Investment Proposal
ACTIVITY
Project Launch/Kickoff and Pre -engagement
Information Sessions (1 for Leaders, 3 for Staff, may be
delivered virtually, on -site, or both)
High Level Organizational Review
Focus Groups, Individual Interviews (requires 2 days on
site with 2 consultants), Qualitative Data Analysis
Quantitative Data Collection, Survey
Design/Deployment, Quantitative Data Analysis
Develop Findings & Recommendations; Report
Construction
Design Implementation Roadmap and Strategic Plan
with Resource Needs and Incremental Touchpoints for
Measurement
PROPOSED HOURS
TIMELINE
Month 0-2 10
Months 1-2 12
Months 2-3 40
Months 3-4 30
Months 4-5 25
Months 4-5 16
Project Closure Including Presentations (may be virtual Month 6 12
or in -person, TBD)
TOTAL HOURS 145
HOURLY RATE $275
TOTAL PROFESSIONAL FEES $39,875
Revised Proposed Workplan and Scope of Work
This revised workplan represents our current understanding of the City of Ashland's
immediate needs We encourage you to view our proposed workplan as a menu. Each
of these items can be scaled up, scaled down, or modified to meet unique
circumstances. The schedule/timeline corresponds with an overall 6-month engagement
and follows a structured and phased approach to activities and deliverables.
ENGAGEMENT STEP
DRAFT SCOPEOF •
ACTIVITIES and DELIVERABLES
TIMELINE
Project Launch
1 . Paradigm to conduct 60 min. kick-off meeting
Month 1
with key stakeholders (may be conducted
virtually).
2. Paradigm to request organizational documents
related to policy and operations throughout
the City and information about partnerships
with external stakeholders.
Phase 1:
1. Conduct an information session with
Months
Building Trust
Executives, Leaders, and individual contributors
1-2
to introduce the project and team, answer
questions, and dispel mthe about DEL
2. Hold 1:1 conversations with leaders to gain
insight about vision for assessment and
education goals.
Phase 2: Conduct
1. Qualitative data collection (may include
Months
Culture and
1:1 interviews, focus groups, listening
2-4
Belonging
sessions).
Assessment
2. Collection and analysis of existing quantitative
data from previous surveys and other data
Human Resources,
collection efforts related to organizational
People
culture and workforce engagement.
Management
3. Conduct detailed review of talent
Review
management policies, procedures, and
practices for the City as a whole and individual
departments and entities as needed.
4. Analyze all data (quantitative and qualitative)
for themes and findings; report back to City for
feedback and collaboration.
5. Develop draft culture report and acquire
feedback from City on results.
6. Periodic touchpoint meetings with key
stakeholders
7. Culture and Belonging Assessment delivery
Phase 3: Design
1. Prioritize recommendations based on urgency,
Months
Implementation
risk, and ease of execution
4-5
Strategy to
2. Categorize recommendations into goals,
Complement
develop overarching performance measures
Assessment
for each goal.
Recommendations
3. Design/develop implementation steps for each
and Finding
goal.
4. Gain feedback from client as to content,
adjust/modify content as needed.
Phase 4: Develop
5. Conduct limited scope SWOT analysis based
Months
18-month DEI
on assessment findings
5-6
Strategic Plan
6. Based on assessment results, identify core goals
and values associated with belonging, culture,
and DEI
7. Articulate action plans for core goals.
8. Incorporate incremental measurement and
metrics points for process improvement.
Phase 5: Project
9. Consolidate all deliverables into a single
Months
Closure
document
6
10. Conduct final presentations as needed to
leadership and elected officials (may be virtual
or on site
•::� Council Study Session
April 1, 2024
Agenda Item
Senate Bill 1537 Land Use and UGB Expansion Update
From
Brandon Goldman
Community Development Director
Contact
Brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us
Item Type
Requested by Council ❑ Update M Request for Direction ❑ Presentation
SUMMARY
Senate Bill 1537 in Oregon streamlines housing development by introducing land use amendments and
offering cities expanded opportunities for urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion, aiming to facilitate the
creation of affordable housing. The bill enhances support for infrastructure development and enforces
housing laws to address the state's housing shortage efficiently.
POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED
Ashland Comprehensive Plan
• Environmental Resources Element (Ch IV):
o Goal: To preserve forest areas within and around the city for their visual, environmental,
wildlife habitat, and water quality values.
Housing Element (Ch. V1):
o Goal: Support the creation and preservation of housing that is affordable to low and
moderate income households and that is commensurate with the incomes of Ashland's
workforce.
o Goal: Encourage the development of housing in ways that protect the natural environment
and encourage development patterns that reduce the effects of climate change.
• Urbanization Element (Ch XII):
o Goal It is the City of Ashland's goal to maintain a compact urban form and to include and
adequate supply of vacant land in the City so as not to hinder natural market forces within
the City, and to ensure and orderly and sequential development of land in the City limits.
Regional Plan Element (Ch XIV):
o Cities that choose to expand their UGBs into land not designated as a URA will be
required to go through the Regional Plan minor or major amendment process prior to
or concurrent with any other process.
o Urban Reserve Management Agreement- Should the City of Ashland at some point in
the future opt to identify urban reserves through a minor amendment process, the
adoption of an Urban Reserve Management Agreement (URMA) between the City and
Jackson County will be required. All development within any future Urban Reserve
Areas identified for the City of Ashland would be regulated in accordance with the
URMA, and Appendix C of this element is reserved for the approved URMA for Ashland's
future Urban Reserve Areas when they are identified.
Page 1 of 6 OF
iam
•I Council Study Session
BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Senate Bill 1537 in Oregon, as requested by Governor Tina Kotek and approved during the 2024
Regular Session is intended to be a comprehensive approach to housing policy reform, aimed at
streamlining the development process, supporting affordable housing projects, and enforcing
housing laws more effectively. The legislation addresses these objectives through the following:
• Establishment of a new Housing Accountability and Production Office to oversee these initiatives.
This office is mandated to work in conjunction with the Department of Land Conservation and
Development and the Department of Consumer and Business Services. Its key responsibilities
include assisting local governments and housing developers with housing laws and enforcing
these laws where necessary.
• Enhances funding mechanisms for housing infrastructure and development. The Housing
Infrastructure Support Fund provides local governments with support for developing
infrastructure that facilitates residential development.
• Expands eligibility for awarding of attorney fees to an applicant whose housing development is
appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals after approval by the local government, in the event
the board affirms the decision. The Act clarifies that "attorney fees" also include the cost of
processing an application. Provisions apply to decisions for which a notice of intent to appeal is
filed on or after January 1, 2025.
• Allows a Land Use application to be reviewed under the standards and criteria in place at the
time the application was submitted [current law], or the applicant can request the application
be subject to the standards that are operative at the time of the request.
• Mandates more efficient local government processes for approving housing projects when
adjustments are requested by developers.
• Provides a streamlined method of urban growth boundary expansions.
The bill also encourages the development of affordable and moderate -income housing by
authorizing cities and counties to offer grants to developers for such projects. A revolving loan
program is to be developed by the Housing and Community Services Department, offering interest -
free loans to cities and counties for funding these grants.
The bill was passed with bipartisan support in both the Senate and the House, indicating a
significant step towards addressing Oregon's housing shortage. Provisions for biennial reporting on
its progress and effectiveness is scheduled to become operative on July 1, 2025.
Land Use Regulations
Goal post rule. The "goal post rule" in Oregon land use planning refers to the principle that an
application for a permit, limited land use decision, or zone change should be reviewed and decided
based on the standards and criteria that were applicable at the time the application was first
submitted. This rule is outlined in ORS 227.178(3)(a), which ensures that if an application was
complete upon first submission, or if the requested additional information was provided within 180
days of the first submission, then the decision to approve or deny should be based on the
regulations in effect at the time of the initial submission.
Page 2 of 6
.'':.\ Council Study Session
Under the amended language in SB1537 an applicant can request that their application be subject to
the standards that are operative at the time of the request. This change relates to the Grandview
Terrace annexation application recently processed in Ashland which was appealed to the Land Use
Board of Appeals (LUBA). In that case the appellant argued that the City errored in exempting the
project from on -street parking requirements that were in place on the date the application was filed,
despite parking requirements having been eliminated by State Climate Friendly and Equitable
Communities rules which were signed into law after the date of submission and in effect at the time
of final decision. This assignment of error was remanded by LUBA to the City of Ashland for further
findings, however the applicant withdrew the application and thus it was never adjudicated by the
appeals court.
Due to this state law change, an applicant can now request any newly adopted standards or criteria
favorable to the applicant be applied in the review of their application, and the city cannot require
the applicant to pay a new application fee to submit a new identical application.
Urban Growth Boundary Expansions (Sections 48-60)
The approved bill allows cities to bring in either 100 acres for cities with a population greater than
25,000 or no more than 50 acres for cities with fewer than 25,000 residents. Ashland has a population
of 21,457 according to Portland State University's Population Research Center and thus would be
eligible for a one-time expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) of up to 50 acres. Despite this
potential allowance, there are questions about which cities might take advantage of this provision,
given the stringent qualifications and concerns about preserving Oregon's land -use laws, which
have historically protected the state's natural resources and limited sprawl.
Under Senate Bill 1537, cities can expand their UGBs if the area meets specific criteria, including the
proximity to the existing UGB, designation of the land as an urban reserve area, or to include non -
resource lands. Under the current legal framework, the City of Ashland faces unique challenges in
pursuing urban growth boundary (UGB) expansions due to its lack of designated Urban Reserve
Areas (URAs). This limitation is particularly evident in the case of properties adjacent to Ashland,
such as those north of East Main Street, which are zoned as Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) resource lands.
Given these zoning classifications, these properties do not qualify for UGB expansion under existing
statutes, representing a significant barrier to the city's efforts to address its housing needs through
spatial expansion.
To navigate these constraints, a proactive strategy involving collaboration with property owners
interested in development could prove pivotal. Specifically, if a property owner adjacent to the
current city limits is considering the use of their land for a housing development, they could prepare
a conceptual plan for such a project of less than 50 acres. This plan would serve as part of a
proposal for the city to request a minor amendment to the Bear Creek Regional Plan, aiming to newly
designate a corresponding Urban Reserve Area for Ashland. This approach not only aligns with
strategic planning principles but may open a pathway for Ashland to expand its UGB in a manner
Page 3 of 6
I�,ia
.''.:� Council Study Session
that accommodates future housing projects. The procedural nuances of securing an URA
designation through Jackson County, including detailed steps and necessary considerations, are
elaborated in the attachment accompanying this communication.
Were Ashland to process a request for a UGB expansion following designation of Urban Reserve
Areas, other applicable criteria outlined in SB1537 in Section 50 for a one-time addition to the UGB
would be met including:
• not having expanded its UGB in the last 20 years,
• lacking a single ownership tract of land over 20 acres within its UGB,
• having a higher percentage of extremely cost -burdened households compared to the state
average,
• having greater than 25% of the rental households as severely rent -burdened
Projects developed within such expanded UGB boundaries will be required to offer 30% of residential
units under affordability restrictions for at least 60 years. SB1537 further establishes that a city could
perform a land exchange in lieu of a UGB amendment, in which case the residential site being added
to the UGB replaces a residential site roughly equivalent in size that is being removed from the UGB.
Housing Land Use Adjustments (Sections 37-43)
Senate Bill 1537 mandates that jurisdictions approve requested "adjustments", or deviations from
existing land use regulations, aimed at facilitating the development of housing projects. This
legislative move is designed to ease regulatory barriers, encouraging the growth of housing
inventory to address affordability and availability challenges in the state.
A development application can an apply for an adjustment under Senate Bill 1537 if the development
is for residential use, within urban growth boundaries and annexed into the city, has a residential
density of at least 6 units per.acre (55(3)(a)(C)), creates new housing units, aims to increase
affordability or accessibility, and does not compromise on safety or environmental standards. The
application must demonstrate how the adjustments will benefit a housing development that
achieves at least one of the following objectives:
• To make the housing development possible by reducing costs or avoiding delays.
• To lower the sale or rental cost of the housing units.
• To increase the total number of housing units.
• To ensure the housing units are affordable for moderate -income households for at least 30
years.
• To ensure at least 20% of units are affordable for low-income households for at least 60 years.
• To add accessibility features that would otherwise be too costly or delayed.
• To support housing affordability through zero equity, limited equity, or shared equity models for a
period of 90 years.
These provisions allow for up to 10 distinct "adjustments" to housing development standards under
specified conditions, enhancing housing development flexibility.
Page 4 of 6
�r
.'".:� Council Study Session
Local governments are mandated by Senate Bill 1537 to allow specific adjustments in housing
development standards to encourage more flexible and efficient housing development. These
adjustments cover various areas, including:
• Up to 10% reduction in minimum side or rear yard setbacks
• Up to 10% reduction in maximum lot coverage.
• Up to 25% reduction in required common areas, open spaces, or landscaping areas.
• Building height can be increased by either one additional story or up to a 20% height increase,
whichever is greater.
• Adjustments to facade materials and window areas are not quantified by specific percentages
but are intended to offer flexibility within the design standards to accommodate a variety of
architectural styles and construction methods, enhancing the feasibility and affordability of
residential developments.
• Modifications to parking requirements, minimum and maximum lot sizes to promote additional
dwelling units without compromising minimum density. This adjustment is less applicable in
Ashland as we have removed all parking minimums from our land use code.
These "adjustments" do not permit an applicant to request uses which are otherwise prohibited
within a specific zoning designation, nor are deviations permitted that relate to building and fire
safety, air quality, stormwater requirements, and environmental protections. The law specifies that
decisions on adjustment applications are limited land use decisions only the applicant may appeal.
These provisions have an operational date of January 1, 2025.
Limited Land Use Decisions (Sections 44 — 47) Includes approval or denial of applications for
replats, property line adjustments, and extension alterations or expansions of a nonconforming use
in the definition of "limited land use decision." Directs cities to only apply procedures specified in ORS
197.195 to limited land use decisions. Places operative date on these provisions of January 1, 2025;
repeals them January 2, 2032.
FISCAL IMPACTS
Expanding a city's urban growth boundaries (UGB) introduces financial unpredictability, primarily
due to indeterminate future infrastructure costs. The initial investment for planning and constructing
essential infrastructure can be substantial. Although widening the UGB has the potential to boost tax
revenues, it concurrently incurs ongoing expenses for the upkeep of new infrastructure, including
roads, utilities, and services. Forecasting these financial implications is challenging, given the
variability in economic conditions, demographic shifts, and fluctuations in housing demand.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Does the City Council have any questions or comments regarding the local implications of the passage of
Senate Bill 1537 and potential for an expedited Urban Growth Boundary expansion?
Page 5 of 6
IrJAW
�•�• Council Study Session
SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS
The City could take several strategic steps to address housing affordability in light of SB 1537. In
evaluating land use code language to be developed in relation to Climate Friendly areas, the City
should contemplate the impact of the Housing Land Use Adjustment provisions in SB1537.
In relation to a UGB expansion request It is crucial to assess whether property owners adjacent to the
Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) are contemplating housing development proposals that comply with
SB 1537's affordability criteria. If a property owner were interested in preparing a general concept
plan, the City could initiate discussions with Jackson County to comprehensively understand the
Urban Reserve Area Designation Process and the intricacies of the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan
Minor Amendment process, especially in the context of the newly passed SB 1537.
REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS
• 2024 Senate Bill 1537
https://olis.oregonIegislature.gov/liz/2024Rl/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SBl537/Enrolled
Page 6 of 6
�aa`1n
82nd OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2024 Regular Session
Enrolled
Senate Bill 1537
Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule 213.28 by order of the President of the Senate in conform-
ance with presession filing rules, indicating neither advocacy nor opposition on the part of the
President (at the request of Governor Tina Kotek for Office of the Governor)
CHAPTER.................................................
AN ACT
Relating to housing; creating new provisions; amending ORS 183.471, 197.015, 197.195, 197.335,
197.843, 215.427, 227.178 and 455.770; and prescribing an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY AND PRODUCTION OFFICE
SECTION 1. Housing Accountability and Production Office. (1) The Department of Land
Conservation and Development and the Department of Consumer and Business Services shall
enter into an interagency agreement to establish and administer the Housing Accountability
and Production Office.
(2) The Housing Accountability and Production Office shall:
(a) Provide technical assistance, including assistance through grants, to local govern-
ments to:
(A) Comply with housing laws;
(B) Reduce permitting and land use barriers to housing production; and
(C) Support reliable and effective implementation of local procedures and standards re-
lating to the approval of residential development projects.
(b) Serve as a resource, which includes providing responses to requests for technical as-
sistance with complying with housing laws, to:
(A) Local governments, as defined in ORS 174.116; and
(B) Applicants for land use and building permits for residential development who are ex-
periencing permitting and land use barriers related to housing production.
(c) Investigate and respond to complaints of violations of housing laws under section 2
of this 2024 Act.
(d) Establish best practices related to model codes, typical drawings and specifications
as described in ORS 455.062, procedures and practices by which local governments may
comply with housing laws.
(e) Provide optional mediation of active disputes relating to housing laws between a local
government and applicants for land use and building permits for residential development,
including mediation under ORS 197.860.
(f) Coordinate agencies that are involved in the housing development process, including,
but not limited to, the Department of Land Conservation and Development, Department of
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 1
Consumer and Business Services, Housing and Community Services Department and Oregon
Business Development Department, to enable the agencies to support local governments and
applicants for land use and building permits for residential development by identifying state
agency technical and financial resources that can address identified housing development and
feasibility barriers.
(g) Establish policy and funding priorities for state agency resources and programs for
the purpose of addressing barriers to housing production, including, but not limited to,
making recommendations for moneys needed for the purposes of section 35 of this 2024 Act.
(3) The Land Conservation and Development Commission and the Department of Con-
sumer and Business Services shall coordinate in adopting, amending or repealing rules for:
(a) Carrying out the respective responsibilities of the departments and the office under
sections 1 to 5 of this 2024 Act.
(b) Model codes, development plans, procedures and practices by which local governments
may comply with housing laws.
(c) Establishing standards by which complaints are investigated and pursued.
(4) The office shall prioritize assisting local governments in voluntarily undertaking
changes to come into compliance with housing laws.
(5) As used in sections 1 to 5 of this 2024 Act:
(a) "Housing law" means ORS chapter 197A and ORS 92.010 to 92.192, 92.830 to 92.845,
197.360 to 197.380, 197.475 to 197.493, 197.505 to 197.540, 197.660 to 197.670, 197.748, 215.402 to
215.438, 227.160 .to 227.186, 455.148, 455.150, 455.152, 455.153, 455.156, 455.157, 455.165, 455.170,
455.175, 455.180, 455.185 to 455.198, 455.200, 455.202 to 455.208, 455.210, 455.220, 455.465 and
455.467 and administrative rules implementing those laws, to the extent that the law or rule
imposes a mandatory duty on a local government or its officers, employees or agents and the
application of the law or rule applies to residential development or pertains to a permit for
a residential use or a division of land for residential purposes.
(b) "Residential" includes mixed -use residential development.
SECTION 2. Office responses to violations of housing laws. (1) The Housing Account-
ability and Production Office shall establish a form or format through which the office re-
ceives allegations of local governments' violations of housing laws that impact housing
production. For complaints that relate to a specific development project, the office may re-
ceive complaints only from the project applicant. For complaints not related to a specific
development project, the office may receive complaints from any person within the local
government's jurisdiction or the Department of Land Conservation and Development or the
Department of Consumer and Business Services.
(2)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection, the office shall. investigate
suspected violations of housing laws or violations credibly alleged under subsection (1) of this
section.
(b) The office shall develop consistent procedures to evaluate and determine the credi-
bility of alleged violations of housing laws.
(c) If a complainant has filed a notice of appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals or
has initiated private litigation regarding any aspect of the application decision that was al-
leged to have been the subject of the housing law violation, the office may not further par-
ticipate in the specific complaint or its appeal, except for:
(A) Providing agency briefs, including briefs under ORS 197.830 (8), to the board or the
court;
(B) Providing technical assistance to the local government unrelated to the resolution
of the specific complaint; or
(C) Mediation at the request of the local government and complainant, including medi-
ation under ORS 197.860.
(3)(a) If the office has a reasonable basis to conclude that a violation was or is being
committed, the office shall deliver written warning notice to the local government specifying
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 2
the violation and any authority under this section that the office intends to invoke if the
violation continues or is not remedied. The notice must include an invitation to address or
remedy the suspected violation through mediation, the execution of a compliance agreement
to voluntarily remedy the situation, the adoption of suitable model codes developed by the
office under section 1 (3)(b) of this 2024 Act or other remedies suitable to the specific vio-
lation.
(b) The office shall prioritize technical assistance funding to local governments that
agree to comply with housing laws under this subsection.
(c) A determination by the office is not a legislative, judicial or quasi-judicial decision.
(4) No earlier than 60 days after a warning notice is delivered under subsection (3) of this
section, the office may:
(a) Initiate a request for an enforcement order of the Land Conservation and Develop-
ment Commission by delivering a notice of request under section 3 (3) of this 2024 Act.
(b) Seek a court order against a local government as described under ORS 455.160 (3)
without being adversely affected or serving the demand as described in ORS 455.160 (2).
(c) Notwithstanding ORS 197.090 (2)(b) to (e), participate in and seek review of a matter
under ORS 197.090 (2)(a) that pertains to housing laws without the notice or consent of the
commission. No less than once every two years, the office shall report to the commission
on the matters in which the office participated under this paragraph.
(d) Except regarding matters under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Land Use Board of
Appeals, apply to a circuit court for an order compelling compliance with any housing law.
If the court finds that the defendant is not complying with a housing law, the court may
grant an injunction requiring compliance.
(5) The office may not, in the name of the office, exercise the authority of the Depart-
ment of Land Conservation and Development under ORS 197AA30.
(6) The office shall send notice to each complainant under subsection (1) of this section
at the time that the office:
(a) Takes any action under subsection (3) or (4) of this section; or
(b) Has determined that it will not take further actions or make further investigations.
(7) The actions authorized of the office under this section are in addition to and may be
exercised in conjunction with any other investigative or enforcement authority that may be
exercised by the Department of Land Conservation and Development, the Land Conservation
and Development Commission or the Department of Consumer and Business Services.
(8) Nothing in this section:
(a) Amends the jurisdiction of the Land Use Board of Appeals or of a circuit court;
(b) Creates a new cause of action; or
(c) Tolls or extends:
(A) The statute of limitations for any claim; or
(B) The deadline for any appeal or other action.
SECTION 3. Office enforcement orders. (1) The Housing Accountability and Production
Office may request an enforcement order under section 2 (4)(a) of this 2024 Act requiring
that a local government take action necessary to bring its comprehensive plan, land use
regulation, limited land use decisions or other land use decisions or actions into compliance
with a housing law, except for a housing law that pertains to the state building code or the
administration of the code.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a request for an enforcement order by
the office is subject to the applicable provisions of ORS 197.335 and ORS chapter 183 and is
not subject to ORS 197.319, 197.324 or 197.328.
(3) The office shall make a request for an enforcement order under this section by de-
livering a notice to the local government that states the grounds for initiation and summa-
rizes the procedures for the enforcement order proceeding along with a copy of the notice
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 3
to the Land Conservation and Development Commission. A decision of the office to initiate
an enforcement order is not subject to appeal.
(4) After receiving notice of an enforcement order request under subsection (3) of this
section, the local government shall deliver a notice to an affected applicant, if any, in sub-
stantially the following form:
NOTICE: The Housing Accountability and Production Office has found good cause for an
enforcement proceeding against (name of local government). An
enforcement order may be adopted that could limit, prohibit or require the application of
specified criteria to any action authorized by this decision but not applied for until after the
adoption of the enforcement order. Future applications for building permits or time exten-
sions may be affected.
(5) Within 14 days after receipt by the commission of the notice under subsection (3) of
this section, the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development shall
assign the enforcement order proceedings to a hearings officer who is:
(a) An administrative law judge assigned under ORS 183.635; or
(b) A hearings officer randomly selected from a pool of officers appointed by the com-
mission to review proceedings initiated under this section.
(6) The hearings officer shall schedule a contested case hearing within 60 days of the
delivery of the notice to the commission under subsection (3) of this section.
(7)(a) The hearings officer shall prepare a proposed enforcement order or order of dis-
missal, including recommended findings and conclusions of law.
(b) A proposed enforcement order may require the local government to take any neces-
sary action to comply with housing laws that is suitable to address the basis for the proposed
enforcement order, including requiring the adoption or application of suitable models that
have been developed by the office under section 1 (3)(b) of this 2024 Act.
(c) The hearings officer must issue and serve the proposed enforcement order on the
office and all parties to the hearing within 30 days of the date the record closed.
(8)(a) The proposed enforcement order becomes a final order of the commission 14 days
after service on the office and all parties to the hearing, unless the office or a party to the
hearing appeals the proposed enforcement order to the commission prior to the proposed
enforcement order becoming final.
(b) If the proposed enforcement order is appealed, the commission shall consider the
matter at:
(A) Its next regularly scheduled meeting; or
(B) If the appeal is made 45 or fewer days prior to the next regularly scheduled meeting,
at the following regularly scheduled meeting or a special meeting held earlier.
(9) The commission shall affirm, affirm with modifications or reverse the proposed
enforcement order. The commission shall issue a final order no later than 30 days after the
meeting'at which it considered the matter.
(10) The commission may adopt rules administering this section, including rules related
to standing, preserving issues for commission review or other provisions concerning the
commission's scope and standard for review of proposed enforcement orders under this sec-
tion.
SECTION 4. Housing Accountability and Production Office Fund. (1) The Housing Ac-
countability and Production Office Fund is established in the State Treasury, separate and
distinct from the General Fund.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 4
(2) The Housing Accountability and Production Office Fund consists of moneys appro-
priated, allocated, deposited or transferred to the fund by the Legislative Assembly or oth-
erwise.
(3) Interest earned by the fund shall be credited to the fund.
(4) Moneys in the fund are continuously appropriated to the Department of Land Con-
servation and Development to administer the fund, to operate the Housing Accountability
and Production Office and to implement sections 1 to 5 of this 2024 Act.
SECTION 5. Reporting. On or before September 15, 2026, the Housing Accountability and
Production Office shall:
(1) Contract with one or more organizations possessing relevant expertise to produce a
report identifying improvements in the local building plan review approval, design review
approval, land use, zoning and permitting processes, including but not limited to plan review
approval timelines, process efficiency, local best practices and other ways to accelerate and
improve the efficiency of the development process for construction, with a focus on in-
creasing housing production.
(2) Produce a report based on a study by the office of state and local timelines and
standards related to public works and building permit application review and develop re-
commendations for changes to reduce complexity, delay or costs that inhibit housing pro-
duction, including an evaluation of their effect on the feasibility of varying housing types and
affordability levels.
(3) Produce a report summarizing state agency plans, policies and programs related to
reducing or eliminating regulatory barriers to the production of housing. The report must
also include recommendations on how state agencies may prioritize resources and programs
to increase housing production.
(4) Provide the reports under subsections (1) to (3) of this section to one or more ap-
propriate interim committees of the Legislative Assembly in the manner provided in ORS
192.245.
SECTION 6. Sunset. Section 5 of this 2024 Act is repealed on January 2, 2027.
SECTION 7. Operative and applicable dates. (1) Sections 2 and 3 of this 2024 Act become
operative on July 1, 2025.
(2) Sections 2 and 3 of this 2024 Act apply only to violations of housing laws occurring
on or after July 1, 2025.
(3) The Department of Land Conservation and Development and Department of Consumer
and Business Services may take any action before the operative date specified in subsection
(1) of this section that is necessary for the departments or the Housing Accountability and
Production Office to exercise, on and after the operative date, all of the duties, functions and
powers conferred by sections 1 to 5, 35, 39 and 46 of this 2024 Act.
OPTING IN TO AMENDED HOUSING REGULATIONS
SECTION S. ORS 215.427 is amended to read:
215.427. (1) Except as provided in subsections (3), (5) and (10) of this section, for land within an
urban growth boundary and applications for mineral aggregate extraction, the governing body of a
county or its designee shall take final action on an application for a permit, limited land use deci-
sion or zone change, including resolution of all appeals under ORS 215.422, within 120 days after the
application is deemed complete. The governing body of a county or its designee shall take final
action on all other applications for a permit, limited land use decision or zone change, including
resolution of all appeals under ORS 215.422, within 150 days after the application is deemed com-
plete, except as provided in subsections (3), (5) and (10) of this section.
(2) If an application for a permit, limited land use decision or zone change is incomplete, the
governing body or its designee shall notify the applicant in writing of exactly what information is
missing within 30 days of receipt of the application and allow the applicant to submit the missing
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 5
information. The application shall be deemed complete for the purpose of subsection (1) of this sec-
tion and ORS 197A.470 upon receipt by the governing body or its designee of:
(a) All of the missing information;
(b) Some of the missing information and written notice from the applicant that no other infor-
mation will be provided; or
(c) Written notice from the applicant that none of the missing information will be provided.
(3)(a) If the application was complete when first submitted or the applicant submits additional
information[, as described in subsection (2) of this section,] within 180 days of the date the application
was first submitted [and the county has a comprehensive plan and land use regulations acknowledged
under ORS 197.2511, approval or denial of the application Ishall be based] must be based:
(A) Upon the standards and criteria that were applicable at the time the application was first
submitted[.]; or
(B) For an application relating to development of housing, upon the request of the ap-
plicant, those standards and criteria that are operative at the time of the request.
(b) If an applicant requests review under different standards as provided in paragraph
(a)(B) of this subsection:
(A) For the purposes of this section, any applicable timelines for completeness review and
final decisions restart as if a new application were submitted on the date of the request;
(B) For the purposes of this section and ORS 197A.470 the application is not deemed
complete until:
(i) The county determines that additional information is not required under subsection
(2) of this section; or
(ii) The applicant makes a submission under subsection (2) of this section in response to
a county's request;
(C) A county may deny a request under paragraph (a)(B) of this subsection if-
(i) The county has issued a public notice of the application; or
(ii) A request under paragraph (a)(B) of this subsection was previously made; and
(D) The county may not require that the applicant:
(i) Pay a fee, except to cover additional costs incurred by the county to accommodate the
request;
(ii) Submit a new application or duplicative information, unless information resubmittal
is required because the request affects or changes information in other locations in the ap-
plication or additional narrative is required to understand the request in context; or
(iii) Repeat redundant processes or hearings that are inapplicable to the change in
standards or criteria.
[(b) If the application is for industrial or traded sector development of a site identified under sec-
tion 12, chapter 800, Oregon Laws 2003, and proposes an amendment to the comprehensive plan, ap-
proval or denial of the application must be based upon the standards and criteria that were applicable
at the time the application was first submitted, provided the application complies with paragraph (a)
of this subsection.]
(4) On the 181st day after first being submitted, the application is void if the applicant has been
notified of the missing information as required under subsection (2) of this section and has not
submitted:
(a) All of the missing information;
(b) Some of the missing information and written notice that no other information will be pro-
vided; or
(c) Written notice that none of the missing information will be provided.
(5) The period set in subsection (1) of this section or the 100-day period set in ORS 197A.470
may be extended for a specified period of time at the written request of the applicant. The total of
all extensions, except as provided in subsection (10) of this section for mediation, may not exceed
215 days.
(6) The period set in subsection (1) of this section applies:
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 6
(a) Only to decisions wholly within the authority and control of the governing body of the
county; and
(b) Unless the parties have agreed to mediation as described in subsection (10) of this section
or ORS 197.319 (2)(b).
(7) Notwithstanding subsection (6) of this section, the period set in subsection (1) of this section
and the 100-day period set in ORS 197A.470 do not apply to:
(a) A decision of the county making a change to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or a land
use regulation that is submitted to the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and De-
velopment under ORS 197.610; or
(b) A decision of a county involving an application for the development of residential structures
within an urban growth boundary, where the county has tentatively approved the application and
extends these periods by no more than seven days in order to assure the sufficiency of its final or-
der.
(8) Except when an applicant requests an extension under subsection (5) of this section, if the
governing body of the county or its designee does not take final action on an application for a
permit, limited land use decision or zone change within 120 days or 150 days, as applicable, after
the application is deemed complete, the county shall refund to the applicant either the unexpended
portion of any application fees or deposits previously paid or 50 percent of the total amount of such
fees or deposits, whichever is greater. The applicant is not liable for additional governmental fees
incurred subsequent to the payment of such fees or deposits. However, the applicant is responsible
for the costs of providing sufficient additional information to address relevant issues identified in
the consideration of the application.
(9) A county may not compel an applicant to waive the period set in subsection (1) of this sec-
tion or to waive the provisions of subsection (8) of this section or ORS 197A.470 or 215.429 as a
condition for taking any action on an application for a permit, limited land use decision or zone
change except when such applications are filed concurrently and considered jointly with a plan
amendment.
(10) The periods set forth in subsections (1) and (5) of this section and ORS 197A.470 may be
extended by up to 90 additional days, if the applicant and the county agree that a dispute concern-
ing the application will be mediated.
SECTION 9. ORS 227.178 is amended to read:
227.178. (1) Except as provided in subsections (3), (5) and (11) of this section, the governing body
of a city or its designee shall take final action on an application for a permit, limited land use de-
cision or zone change, including resolution of all appeals under ORS 227.180, within 120 days after
the application is deemed complete.
(2) If an application for a permit, limited land use decision or zone change is incomplete, the
governing body or its designee shall notify the applicant in writing of exactly what information is
missing within 30 days of receipt of the application and allow the applicant to submit the missing
information. The application shall be deemed complete for the purpose of subsection (1) of this sec-
tion or ORS 197A.470 upon receipt by the governing body or its designee of:
(a) All of the missing information;
(b) Some of the missing information and written notice from the applicant that no other infor-
mation will be provided; or
(c) Written notice from the applicant that none of the missing information will be provided.
(3)(a) If the application was complete when first submitted or the applicant submits the re-
quested additional information within 180 days of the date the application was first submitted [and
the city has a comprehensive plan and land use regulations acknowledged under ORS 197.2511, ap-
proval or denial of the application [shall] must be based:
(A) Upon the standards and criteria that were applicable at the time the application was first
submitted[.]; or
(B) For an application relating to development of housing, upon the request of the ap-
plicant, those standards and criteria that are operative at the time of the request.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 7
(b) If an applicant requests review under different standards as provided in paragraph
(a)(B) of this subsection:
(A) For the purposes of this section, any applicable timelines for completeness review and
final decisions restart as if a new application were submitted on the date of the request;
(B) For the purposes of this section and ORS 197A.470 the application is not deemed
complete until:
(i) The city determines that additional information is not required under subsection (2)
of this section; or
(ii) The applicant makes a submission under subsection (2) of this section in response to
a city's request;
(C) A city may deny a request under paragraph (a)(B) of this subsection if-
(i) The city has issued a public notice of the application; or
(ii) A request under paragraph (a)(B) of this subsection was previously made; and
(D) The city may not require that the applicant:
(i) Pay a fee, except to cover additional costs incurred by the city to accommodate the
request;
(ii) Submit a new application or duplicative information, unless information resubmittal
is required because the request affects or changes information in other locations in the ap-
plication or additional narrative is required to understand the request in context; or
(iii) Repeat redundant processes or hearings that are inapplicable to the change in
standards or criteria.
[(b) If the application is for industrial or traded sector development of a site identified under sec-
tion 12, chapter 800, Oregon Laws 2003, and proposes an. amendment to the comprehensive plan, ap-
proval or denial of the application must be based upon the standards and criteria that were applicable
at the time the application was first submitted, provided the application complies with paragraph (a)
of this subsection.]
(4) On the 181st day after first being submitted, the application is void if the applicant has been
notified of the missing information as required under subsection (2) of this section and has not
submitted:
(a) All of the missing information;
(b) Some of the missing information and written notice that no other information will be pro-
vided; or
(c) Written notice that none of the missing information will be provided.
(5) The 120-day period set in subsection (1) of this section or the 100-day period set in ORS
197A.470 may be extended for a specified period of time at the written request of the applicant.
The total of all extensions, except as provided in subsection (11) of this section for mediation, may
not exceed 245 days.
(6) The 120-day period set in subsection (1) of this section applies:
(a) Only to decisions wholly within the authority and control of the governing body of the city;
and
(b) Unless the parties have agreed to mediation as described in subsection (11) of this section
or -ORS 197.319 (2)(b).
(7) Notwithstanding subsection (6) of this section, the 120-day period set in subsection (1) of this
section and the 100-day period set in ORS 197A.470 do not apply to:
(a) A decision of the city making a change to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or a land
use regulation that is submitted to the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and De-
velopment under ORS 197.610; or
(b) A decision of a city involving an application for the development of residential structures
within an urban growth boundary, where the city has tentatively approved the application and ex-
tends these periods by no more than seven days in order to assure the sufficiency of its final order.
(8) Except when an applicant requests an extension under subsection (5) of this section, if the
governing body of the city or its designee does not take final action on an application for a permit,
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 8
limited land use decision or zone change within 120 days after the application is deemed complete,
the city shall refund to the applicant, subject to the provisions of subsection (9) of this section, ei-
ther the unexpended portion of any application fees or deposits previously paid or 50 percent of the
total amount of such fees or deposits, whichever is greater. The applicant is not liable for additional
governmental fees incurred subsequent to the payment of such fees or deposits. However, the ap-
plicant is responsible for the costs of providing sufficient additional information to address relevant
issues identified in the consideration of the application.
(9)(a) To obtain a refund under subsection (8) of this section, the applicant may either:
(A) Submit a written request for payment, either by mail or in person, to the city or its designee;
or
(B) Include the amount claimed in a mandamus petition filed under ORS 227.179. The court shall
award an amount owed under this section in its final order on the petition.
(b) Within seven calendar days of receiving a request for a refund, the city or its designee shall
determine the amount of any refund owed. Payment, or notice that no payment is due, shall be made
to the applicant within 30 calendar days of receiving the request. Any amount due and not paid
within 30 calendar days of receipt of the request shall be subject to interest charges at the rate of
one percent per month, or a portion thereof.
(c) If payment due under paragraph (b) of this subsection is not paid within 120 days after the
city or its designee receives the refund request, the applicant may file an action for recovery of the
unpaid refund. In an action brought by a person under this paragraph, the court shall award to a
prevailing applicant, in addition to the relief provided in this section, reasonable attorney fees and
costs at trial and on appeal. If the city or its designee prevails, the court shall award reasonable
attorney fees and costs at trial and on appeal if the court finds the petition to be frivolous.
(10) A city may not compel an applicant to waive the 120-day period set in subsection (1) of this
section or to waive the provisions of subsection (8) of this section or ORS 197A.470 or 227.179 as
a condition for taking any action on an application for a permit, limited land use decision or zone
change except when such applications are filed concurrently and considered jointly with a plan
amendment.
(11) The periods set forth in subsections (1) and (5) of this section and ORS 197A.470 may be
extended by up to 90 additional days, if the applicant and the city agree that a dispute concerning
the application will be mediated.
ATTORNEY FEES FOR NEEDED HOUSING CHALLENGES
SECTION 10. ORS 197.843 is amended to read:
197.843. (1) The Land Use Board of Appeals shall award attorney fees to:
(a) An applicant whose application is only for the development of affordable housing[, as defined
in ORS 197A.445, or publicly supported housing, as defined in ORS 456.2501, if the board [affirms a
quasi-judicial land use decision approving the application or] reverses a quasi-judicial land use deci-
sion denying the application[.];
(b) An applicant whose application is only for the development of housing and was ap-
proved by the local government, if the board affirms the decision; and
(c) The local government that approved a quasi-judicial land use decision described in
paragraph (b) of this subsection.
(2) For housing other than affordable housing, the attorney fees specified in subsection
(1)(b) and (c) of this section apply only within urban growth boundaries.
[(2)] (3) A party who was awarded attorney fees under this section or ORS 197.850 shall repay
the fees plus any interest from the time of the judgment if the property upon which the fees are
based is developed for a use other than [affordable] the proposed housing.
[(3)] (4) As used in this section:
[(a) `Applicant" includes:]
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-13) Page 9
VA) An applicant with a funding reservation agreement with a public funder for the purpose of
developing publicly supported housing;]
[(B) A housing authority, as defined in ORS 456.005;1
[(C) A qualified housing sponsor, as defined in ORS 456.548;]
VD) A religious nonprofit corporation;]
[(E) A public benefit nonprofit corporation whose primary purpose is the development of affordable
housing; and]
[(F) A local government that approved the application of an applicant described in this
paragraph.]
(a) "Affordable housing" means affordable housing, as defined in ORS 197A.445, or pub-
licly supported housing, as defined in ORS 456.250.
(b) "Attorney fees" includes prelitigation legal expenses, including preparing and processing
the application and supporting the application in local land use hearings or proceedings.
SECTION 11. Operative and applicable dates. (1) The amendments to ORS 197.843 by
section 10 of this 2024 Act become operative on January 1, 2025.
(2) The amendments to ORS 197.843 by section 10 of this 2024 Act apply to decisions for
which a notice of intent to appeal under ORS 197.830 is filed on or after January 1, 2025.
INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORTING HOUSING PRODUCTION
SECTION 12. Sections 13 and 14 of this 2024 Act are added to and made a part of ORS
chapter 285A.
SECTION 13. Capacity and support for infrastructure planning. The Oregon Business
Development Department shall provide capacity and support for infrastructure planning to
municipalities to enable them to plan and finance infrastructure for water, sewers and san-
itation, stormwater and transportation consistent with opportunities to produce housing
units at densities defined in section 55 (3)(a)(C) of this 2024 Act. "Capacity and support" in-
cludes assistance with local financing opportunities, state and federal grant navigation,
writing, review and administration, resource sharing, regional collaboration support and
technical support, including engineering and design assistance and other capacity or support
as the department may designate by rule.
SECTION 14. Housing Infrastructure Support Fund. (1) The Housing Infrastructure
Support Fund is established in the State Treasury, separate and distinct from the General
Fund.
(2) The Housing Infrastructure Support Fund consists of moneys appropriated, allocated,
deposited or transferred to the fund by the Legislative Assembly or otherwise.
(3) Interest earned by the fund shall be credited to the fund.
(4) Moneys in the fund are continuously appropriated to the Oregon Business Develop-
ment Department to administer the fund and to implement section 13 of this 2024 Act.
SECTION 15. Sunset. (1) Sections 13 and 14 of this 2024 Act are repealed on January 2,
2030.
(2) Any unobligated moneys in the Housing Infrastructure Support Fund on January 2,
2030, must be transferred to the General Fund for general governmental purposes.
SECTION 16. Infrastructure recommendation and reporting. (1) On or before December
31, 2024, the Department of Land Conservation and Development, in consultation with the
Housing and Community Services Department, the Oregon Business Development Depart-
ment and other agencies that fund and support local infrastructure projects, shall submit a
report to an appropriate interim committee of the Legislative Assembly in the manner pro-
vided in ORS 192.245 that includes a list of key considerations and metrics the Legislative
Assembly could use to evaluate, screen and prioritize proposed local infrastructure projects
that facilitate and support housing within an urban growth boundary.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 10
(2) The Department of Land Conservation and Development shall facilitate an engage-
ment process with local governments, tribal nations, the development community, housing
advocates, conservation groups, property owners, community partners and other interested
parties to inform the list of key considerations and metrics.
NOTE: Sections 17 through 23 were deleted by amendment. Subsequent sections were not re-
numbered.
HOUSING PROJECT REVOLVING LOANS
SECTION 24. As used in sections 24 to 35 of this 2024 Act:
(1) "Assessor," "tax collector" and "treasurer" mean the individual filling that county
office so named or any county officer performing the functions of the office under another
name.
(2) "County tax officers" and "tax officers" mean the assessor, tax collector and treas-
urer of a county.
(3) "Eligible costs" means the following costs associated with an eligible housing project:
(a) Infrastructure costs, including, but not limited to, system development charges;
(b) Predevelopment costs;
(c) Construction costs; and
(d) Land write -downs.
(4) "Eligible housing project" means a project to construct housing, or to convert a
building from a nonresidential use to housing, that is:
(a) Affordable to households with low income or moderate income as those terms are
defined in ORS 458.610;
(b) If for -sale property, a single-family dwelling, middle housing as defined in ORS
197A.420 or a multifamily dwelling that is affordable as described in paragraph (a) of this
subsection continuously from initial sale for a period, to be established by the Housing and
Community Services Department and the sponsoring jurisdiction, of not less than the term
of the loan related to the for -sale property; or
(c) If rental property:
(A)(i) Middle housing as defined in ORS 197A.420;
(ii) A multifamily dwelling;
(iii) An accessory dwelling unit as defined in ORS 215.501; or
(iv) Any other form of affordable housing or moderate income housing; and
(B) Rented at a monthly rate that is affordable to households with an annual income not
greater than 120 percent of the area median income, such affordability to be maintained for
a period, to be established by the department and the sponsoring jurisdiction, of not less than
the term of the loan related to the rental property.
(5) "Eligible housing project property" means the taxable real and personal property
constituting the improvements of an.eligible housing project.
(6) "Fee payer" means, for any property tax year, the person responsible for paying ad
valorem property taxes on eligible housing project property to which a grant awarded under
section 29 of this 2024 Act relates.
(7) "Fire district taxes" means property taxes levied by fire districts within whose terri-
tory all or a portion of eligible housing project property is located.
(8) "Nonexempt property" means property other than eligible housing project property
in the tax account that includes eligible housing project property.
(9) "Nonexempt taxes" means the ad valorem property taxes assessed on nonexempt
property.
(10) "Sponsoring jurisdiction" means:
(a)(A) A city with respect to eligible housing projects located within the city boundaries;
or
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 11
(B) A county with respect to eligible housing projects located in urban unincorporated
areas of the county; or
(b) The governing body of a city or county described in paragraph (a) of this subsection.
SECTION 25. (1)(a) A sponsoring jurisdiction may adopt by ordinance or resolution a
program under which the sponsoring jurisdiction awards grants to developers for eligible
costs.
(b) Before adopting the program, the sponsoring jurisdiction shall consult with the gov-
erning body of any city or county with territory inside the boundaries of the sponsoring ju-
risdiction.
(2) The ordinance or resolution shall set forth:
(a) The kinds of eligible housing projects for which a developer may seek a grant under
the program; and
(b) Any eligibility requirements to be imposed on projects and developers in addition to
those required under sections 24 to 35 of this 2024 Act.
(3) A grant award:
(a) Shall be in the amount determined under section 26 (3) of this 2024 Act; and
(b) May include reimbursement for eligible costs incurred for up to 12 months preceding
the date on which the eligible housing project received local site approval.
(4) Eligible housing project property for which a developer receives a grant for eligible
costs may not be granted any exemption, partial exemption or special assessment of ad
valorem property taxes other than the exemption granted under section 30 of this 2024 Act.
(5) A sponsoring jurisdiction may amend an ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to
this section at any time. The amendments shall apply only to applications submitted under
section 26 of this 2024 Act on or after the effective date of the ordinance or resolution.
SECTION 26. (1)(a) A sponsoring jurisdiction that adopts a grant program pursuant to
section 25 of this 2024 Act shall prescribe an application process, including forms and dead-
lines, by which a developer may apply for a grant with respect to an eligible housing project.
(b) An application for a grant must include, at a minimum:
(A) A description of the eligible housing project;
(B) A detailed explanation of the affordability of the eligible housing project;
(C) An itemized description of the eligible costs for which the grant is sought;
(D) The proposed schedule for completion of the eligible housing project;
(E) A project pro forma demonstrating that the project would not be economically fea-
sible but for receipt of the grant moneys; and
(F) Any other information, documentation or attestation that the sponsoring jurisdiction
considers necessary or convenient for the application review process.
(c)(A) The project pro forma under paragraph (b)(E) of this subsection shall be on a form
provided to the sponsoring jurisdiction by the Housing and Community Services Department
and made available to grant applicants.
(B) The department may enter into an agreement with a third party to develop the
project pro forma template.
(2)(a) The review of an application under this section shall be completed within 90 days
following the receipt of the application by the sponsoring jurisdiction.
(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection:
(A) The sponsoring jurisdiction may in its sole discretion extend the review process be-
yond 90 days if the volume of applications would make timely completion of the review
process unlikely.
(B) The sponsoring jurisdiction may consult with a developer about the developer's ap-
plication, and the developer, after the consultation, may amend the application on or before
a deadline set by the sponsoring jurisdiction.
(3) The sponsoring jurisdiction shall:
(a) Review each application;
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 12
(b) Request that the county tax officers provide to the sponsoring jurisdiction the
amounts determined under section 27 of this 2024 Act;
(c) Set the term of the loan that will fund the grant award for a period not to exceed the
greater of:
(A) Ten years following July 1 of the first property tax year for which the completed el-
igible housing project property is estimated to be taken into account; or
(B) If agreed upon by the sponsoring jurisdiction and the department, the period required
for the loan principal and fees to be repaid in full;
(d) Set the amount of the grant that may be awarded to the developer under section 29
(2) of this 2024 Act by multiplying the increment determined under section 27 (1)(c) of this
2024 Act by the term of the loan; and
(e)(A) Provisionally approve the application as submitted;
(B) Provisionally approve the application on terms other than those requested in the
application; or
(C) Reject the application.
(4)(a) The sponsoring jurisdiction shall forward provisionally approved applications to the
Housing and Community Services Department.
(b) The department shall review the provisionally approved applications for completeness,
including, but not limited to, the completeness of the project pro forma submitted with the
application under subsection (1)(b)(E) of this section and the amounts computed under sec-
tion 27 (1) of this 2024 Act and notify the sponsoring jurisdiction of its determination.
(5)(a) If the department has determined that a provisionally approved application is in-
complete, the sponsoring jurisdiction may:
(A) Consult with the applicant developer and reconsider the provisionally approved ap-
plication after the applicant revises it; or
(B) Reject the provisionally approved application.
(b) If the department has determined that a provisionally approved application is com-
plete, the approval shall be final.
(c) The sponsoring jurisdiction shall notify each applicant and the department of the final
approval or rejection of an application and the amount of the grant award.
(d) The rejection of an application and the amount of a grant award may not be appealed,
but a developer may reapply for a grant at any time within the applicable deadlines of the
grant program for the same or another eligible housing project.
(6) Upon request by a sponsoring jurisdiction, the department may assist the sponsoring
jurisdiction with, or perform on behalf of the sponsoring jurisdiction, any duty required un-
der this section.
SECTION 27. (1) Upon request of the. sponsoring jurisdiction under section 26 (3)(b) of
this 2024 Act, the assessor of the county in which is located the eligible housing project to
which an application being reviewed under section 26 of this 2024 Act relates shall:
(a) Using the last certified assessment roll for the property tax year in which the appli-
cation is received under section 26 of this 2024 Act:
(A) Determine the amount of property taxes assessed against all tax accounts that in-
clude the eligible housing project property; and
(B) Subtract the amount of operating taxes as defined in ORS 310.055 and local option
taxes as defined in ORS 310.202 levied by fire districts from the amount determined under
subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.
(b) For the first property tax year for which the completed eligible housing project
property is estimated to be taken into account:
(A) Determine the estimated amount of property taxes that will be assessed against all
tax accounts that include the eligible housing project property; and
(B) Subtract the estimated amount of operating taxes and local option taxes levied by fire
districts from the amount determined under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 13
(c) Determine the amount of the increment that results from subtracting the amount
determined under subsection (1)(a) of this section from the amount determined under sub-
section (1)(b) of this section.
(2) As soon as practicable after determining amounts under this section, the county tax
officers shall provide written notice to the sponsoring jurisdiction of the amounts.
SECTION 28. (1)(a) The Housing and Community Services Department shall develop a
program to make loans to sponsoring jurisdictions to fund grants awarded under the spon-
soring jurisdiction's grant program adopted pursuant to section 25 of this 2024 Act.
(b) The loans shall be interest free for the term set by the sponsoring jurisdiction under
section 26 (3)(c) of this 2024 Act.
(2) For each application approved under section 26 (5)(b) of this 2024 Act, the Housing
and Community Services Department shall:
(a) Enter into a loan agreement with the sponsoring jurisdiction for a payment in an
amount equal to the total of:
(A) Loan proceeds in an amount equal to the grant award for the application set under
section 26 (3)(d) of this 2024 Act; and
(B) The administrative costs set forth in subsection (3) of this section; and
(b) Pay to the sponsoring jurisdiction the total amount set forth in paragraph (a) of this
subsection out of the Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund established under section 35 of
this 2024 Act.
(3) The administrative costs referred to in subsection (2)(a)(B) of this section are:
(a) An amount not greater than five percent of the loan proceeds to reimburse the
sponsoring jurisdiction for the costs of administering the grant program, other than the
costs of tax administration; and
(b) An amount equal to one percent of the loan proceeds to be transferred to the county
in which the sponsoring jurisdiction is situated to reimburse the county for the costs of the
tax administration of the grant program by the county tax officers.
(4) The Housing and Community Services Department may assign any and all loan
amounts made under this section to the Department of Revenue for collection as provided
in ORS 293.250.
(5) The Housing and Community Services Department may:
(a) Consult with the Oregon Business Development Department about any of the powers
and duties conferred on the Housing and Community Services Department by sections 24 to
35 of this 2024 Act; and
(b) Adopt any rule it considers necessary or convenient for the administration of sections
24 to 35 of this 2024 Act by the Housing and Community Services Department.
SECTION 29. (1) Upon entering into a loan agreement with the Housing and Community
Services Department under section 28 of this 2024 Act, a sponsoring jurisdiction shall offer
a grant agreement to each developer whose application was approved under section 26 (5)(b)
of this 2024 Act.
(2) The grant agreement shall:
(a) Include a grant award in the amount set under section 26 (3)(d) of this 2024 Act; and
(b) Contain terms that:
(A) Are required under sections 24 to 35 of this 2024 Act or the ordinance or resolution
adopted by the sponsoring jurisdiction pursuant to section 25 of this 2024 Act.
(B) Do not conflict with sections 24 to 35 of this 2024 Act or the ordinance or resolution
adopted by the sponsoring jurisdiction pursuant to section 25 of this 2024 Act.
(3) Upon entering into a grant agreement with a developer, a sponsoring jurisdiction shall
adopt an ordinance or resolution setting forth the details of the eligible housing project that
is the subject of the agreement, including but not limited to:
(a) A description of the eligible housing project;
(b) An itemized description of the eligible costs;
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 14
(c) The amount and terms of the grant award;
(d) Written notice that the eligible housing project property is exempt from property
taxation in accordance with section 30 of this 2024 Act; and
(e) A statement declaring that the grant has been awarded in response to the housing
needs of communities within the sponsoring jurisdiction.
(4) Unless otherwise specified in the grant agreement, as soon as practicable after the
ordinance or resolution required under subsection (3) of this section becomes effective, the
sponsoring jurisdiction shall distribute the loan proceeds received from the department un-
der section 28 (2)(a)(A) of this 2024 Act to the developer as the grant moneys awarded under
this section.
(5) The sponsoring jurisdiction shall forward to the tax officers of the county in which
the eligible housing project is located a copy of the grant agreement, the ordinance or re-
solution and any other material the sponsoring jurisdiction considers necessary for the tax
officers to perform their duties under sections 24 to 35 of this 2024 Act or the ordinance or
resolution.
(6) Upon request, the department may assist the sponsoring jurisdiction with, or perform
on behalf of the sponsoring jurisdiction, any duty required under this section.
SECTION 30. (1) Upon receipt of the copy of a grant agreement and ordinance or resol-
ution from the sponsoring jurisdiction under section 29 (5) of this 2024 Act, the assessor of
the county in which eligible housing project property is located shall:
(a) Exempt the eligible housing project property in accordance with this section;
(b) Assess and tax the nonexempt property in the tax account as other similar property
is assessed and taxed; and
(c) Submit a written report to the sponsoring jurisdiction setting forth the assessor's
estimate of the amount oh
(A) The real market value of the exempt eligible housing project property; and
(B) The property taxes on the exempt eligible housing project property that would have
been collected if the property were not exempt.
(2)(a) The exemption shall first apply to the first property tax year that begins after
completion of the eligible housing project to which the grant relates.
(b) The eligible housing project property shall be disqualified from the exemption on the
earliest of:
(A) July 1 of the property tax year immediately succeeding the date on which the fee
payment obligation under section 32 of this 2024 Act that relates to the eligible housing
project is repaid in full;
(B) The date on which the annual fee imposed on the fee payer under section 32 of this
2024 Act becomes delinquent;
(C) The date on which foreclosure proceedings are commenced as provided by law for
delinquent nonexempt taxes assessed with respect to the tax account that includes the eli-
gible housing project; or
(D) The date on which a condition specified in section 33 (1) of this 2024 Act occurs.
(c) After the eligible housing project property has been disqualified from the exemption
under this subsection, the property shall be assessed and taxed as other similar property is
assessed and taxed.
(3) For each tax year that the eligible housing project property is exempt from taxation,
the assessor shall enter a notation on the assessment roll stating:
(a) That the property is exempt under this section; and
(b) The presumptive number of property tax years for which the exemption is granted,
which shall be the term of the loan agreement relating to the eligible housing project set
under section 26 (3)(c) of this 2024 Act.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 15
SECTION 31. (1) Repayment of loans made under section 28 of this 2024 Act shall begin,
in accordance with section 32 of this 2024 Act, after completion of the eligible housing project
funded by the grant to which the loan relates.
(2)(a) The sponsoring jurisdiction shall determine the date of completion of an eligible
housing project.
(b)(A) If an eligible housing project is completed before July 1 of the assessment year,
repayment shall begin with the property tax year that begins on July 1 of the assessment
year.
(B) If an eligible housing project is completed on or after July 1 of the assessment year,
repayment shall begin with the property tax year that begins on July 1 of the succeeding
assessment year.
(c) After determining the date of completion under paragraph (a) of this subsection, the
sponsoring jurisdiction shall notify the Housing and Community Services Department and the
county tax officers of the determination.
(3) A loan shall remain outstanding until repaid in full.
SECTION 32. (1) The fee payer for eligible housing project property that has been granted
exemption under section 30 of this 2024 Act shall pay an annual fee for the term that shall
be the presumptive number of years for which the property is granted exemption under
section 30 (3)(b) of this 2024 Act.
(2)(a) The amount of the fee for the first property tax year in which repayment of the
loan is due under section 31 (1) of this 2024 Act shall equal the total of:
(A) .The portion of the increment determined under section 27 (1)(c) of this 2024 Act that
is attributable to the eligible housing project property to which the fee relates; and
(B) The administrative costs described in section 28 (3) of this 2024 Act divided by the
term of the grant agreement entered into under section 29 of this 2024 Act.
(b) For each subsequent property tax year, the amount of the fee shall be 103 percent
of the amount of the fee for the preceding property tax year.
(3)(a) Not later than July 15 of each property tax year during the term of the fee obli-
gation, the sponsoring jurisdiction shall certify to the assessor each fee amount that became
due under this section on or after July 16 of the previous property tax year from fee payers
with respect to eligible housing projects located in the sponsoring jurisdiction.
(b) The assessor shall place each fee amount on the assessment and tax rolls of the
county and notify:
(A) The sponsoring jurisdiction of each fee amount and the aggregate of all fee amounts
imposed with respect to eligible housing project property located in the sponsoring jurisdic-
tion.
(B) The Housing and Community Services Department of each fee amount and the ag-
gregate of all fee amounts with respect to all eligible housing project property located in the
county.
(4)(a) The assessor shall include on the tax statement of each tax account that includes
exempt eligible housing project property the amount of the fee imposed on the fee payer with
respect to the eligible housing project property.
(b) The fee shall be collected and enforced in the same manner as ad valorem property
taxes, including nonexempt taxes, are collected and enforced.
(5)(a) For each property tax year in which a fee is payable under this section, the treas-
urer shall:
(A) Estimate the amount of operating taxes as defined in ORS 310.055 and local option
taxes as defined in ORS 310.202 levied by fire districts that would have been collected on el-
igible housing project property if the property were not exempt;
(B) Distribute out of the fee moneys the amounts determined under subparagraph (A)
of this paragraph to the respective fire districts when other ad valorem property taxes are
distributed under ORS 311.395; and
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 16
(C) Transfer the net fee moneys to the Housing and Community Services Department for
deposit in the Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund established under section 35 of this 2024
Act in repayment of the loans to which the fees relate.
(b) Nonexempt taxes shall be distributed in the same manner as other ad valorem prop-
erty taxes are distributed.
(6) Any person with an interest in the eligible housing project property on the date on
which any fee amount becomes due shall be jointly and severally liable for payment of the
fee amount.
(7) Any loan amounts that have not been repaid when the fee payer has discharged its
obligations in full under this section remain the obligation of the sponsoring jurisdiction that
obtained the loan from the department under section 28 of this 2024 Act.
(8) Any fee amounts collected in excess of the loan amount shall be distributed in the
same manner as other ad valorem property taxes are distributed.
SECTION 33. (1)(a) A developer that received a grant award under section 29 of this 2024
Act shall become liable for immediate payment of any outstanding annual fee payments im-
posed under section 32 of this 2024 Act for the entire term of the fee if:
(A) The developer has not completed the eligible housing project within three years fol-
lowing the date on which the grant moneys were distributed to the developer;
(B) The eligible housing project changes substantially from the project for which the
developer's application was approved such that the project would not have been eligible for
the grant; or
(C) The developer has not complied with a requirement specified in the grant agreement.
(b) The sponsoring jurisdiction may, in its sole discretion, extend the date on which the
eligible housing project must be completed.
(2) If the sponsoring jurisdiction discovers that a developer willfully made a false state-
ment or misrepresentation or willfully failed to report a material fact to obtain a grant with
respect to an eligible housing project, the sponsoring jurisdiction may impose on the devel-
oper a penalty not to exceed 20 percent of the amount of the grant so obtained, plus any
applicable interest and fees associated with the costs of collection.
(3) Any amounts imposed under subsection (1) or (2) of this section shall be a lien on the
eligible housing project property and the nonexempt property in the tax account.
(4) The sponsoring jurisdiction shall provide written notice of any amounts that become
due under subsections (1) and (2) of this section to the county tax officers and the Housing
and Community Services Department.
(5)(a) Any and all amounts required to be paid under this section shall be considered to
be liquidated and delinquent, and the Housing and Community Services Department shall
assign such amounts to the Department of Revenue for collection as provided in ORS 293.250.
(b) Amounts collected under this subsection shall be deposited, net of any collection
charges, in the Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund established under section 35 of this
2024 Act.
SECTION 34. (1) Not later than June 30 of each year in which a grant agreement entered
into under section 29 of this 2024 Act is in effect, a developer that is party to the agreement
shall submit a report to the sponsoring jurisdiction in which the eligible housing project is
located that contains:
(a) The status of the construction or conversion of the eligible housing project property,
including an estimate of the date of completion;
(b) An itemized description of the uses of the grant moneys; and
(c) Any information the sponsoring jurisdiction considers important for evaluating the
eligible housing project and the developer's performance under the terms of the grant
agreement.
(2) Not later than August 15 of each year, each sponsoring jurisdiction shall submit to
the Housing and Community Services Department a report containing such information re -
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 17
lating to eligible housing projects within the sponsoring jurisdiction as the department re-
quires.
(3)(a) Not later than November 15 of each year, the department shall submit, in the
manner required under ORS 192.245, a report to the interim committees of the Legislative
Assembly related to housing.
(b) The report shall set forth in detail:
(A) The information received from sponsoring jurisdictions under subsection (2) of this
section;
(B) The status of the repayment of all outstanding loans made under section 28 of this
2024 Act and of the payment of all fees imposed under section 32 of this 2024 Act and all
amounts imposed under section 33 of this 2024 Act; and
(C) The cumulative experience of the program developed and implemented under sections
24 to 35 of this 2024 Act.
(c) The report may include recommendations for legislation.
SECTION 35. (1) The Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund is established in the State
Treasury, separate and distinct from the General Fund. Interest earned by the Housing
Project Revolving Loan Fund shall be credited to the fund.
(2) Moneys in the fund may be invested as provided by ORS 293.701 to 293.857, and the
earnings from the investments shall be credited to the fund.
(3) Moneys in the Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund shall consist oh.
(a) Amounts appropriated or otherwise transferred or credited to the fund by the Legis-
lative Assembly;
(b) Net fee moneys transferred under section 32 of this 2024 Act;
(c) Amounts deposited in the fund under section 33 of this 2024 Act;
(d) Interest and other earnings received on moneys in the fund; and
(e) Other moneys or proceeds of property from any public or private source that are
transferred, donated or otherwise credited to the fund.
(4) Moneys in the Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund are continuously appropriated
to the Housing and Community Services Department for the purpose of paying amounts de-
termined under section 28 of this 2024 Act.
(5) Moneys in the Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund at the end of a biennium shall
be retained in the fund and used for the purposes set forth in subsection (4) of this section.
SECTION 36. (1) The Housing and Community Services Department shall have developed
and begun operating the loan program that the department is required to develop under
section 28 of this 2024 Act, including regional trainings and outreach for jurisdictional part-
ners, no later than June 30, 2025.
(2) In the first two years in which .the loan program is operating, the department may
not expend an amount in excess of two-thirds of the moneys appropriated to the department
for the purpose under section 62 of this 2024 Act.
HOUSING LAND USE ADJUSTMENTS
SECTION 37. Sections 38 to 41 of this 2024 Act are added to and made a part of ORS
chapter 197A.
SECTION 38. Mandatory adjustment to housing development standards. (1) As used in
sections 38 to 41 of this 2024 Act:
(a) "Adjustment" means a deviation from an existing land use regulation.
(b) "Adjustment" does not include:
(A) A request to allow a use of property not otherwise permissible under applicable zon-
ing requirements;
(B) Deviations from land use regulations or requirements related to accessibility,
affordability, fire ingress or egress, safety, local tree codes, hazardous or contaminated site
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 18
clean-up, wildlife protection, or statewide land use planning goals relating to natural re-
sources, natural hazards, the Willamette River Greenway, estuarine resources, coastal
shorelands, beaches and dunes or ocean resources;
(C) A complete waiver of land use regulations or any changes beyond the explicitly re-
quested and allowed adjustments; or
(D) Deviations to requirements related to the implementation of fire or building codes,
federal or state air, water quality or surface, ground or stormwater requirements, or re-
quirements of any federal, state or local law other than a land use regulation.
(2) Except as provided in section 39 of this 2024 Act, a local government shall grant a
request for an adjustment in an application to develop housing as provided in this section.
An application qualifies for an adjustment under this section only if the following conditions
are met:
(a) The application is for a building permit or a quasi-judicial, limited or ministerial land
use decision;
(b) The development is on lands zoned to allow for residential uses, including mixed -use
residential;
(c) The residential development is for densities not less than those required under section
55 (3)(a)(C) of this 2024 Act;
(d) The development is within an urban growth boundary, not including lands that have
not been annexed by a city;
(e) The development is of net new housing units in new construction projects, including:
(A) Single-family or multifamily;
(B) Mixed -use residential where at least 75 percent of the developed floor area will be
used for residential uses;
(C) Manufactured dwelling parks;
(D) Accessory dwelling units; or
(E) Middle housing as defined in ORS 197A.420;
(f) The application requests not more than 10 distinct adjustments to development
standards as provided in this section. A "distinct adjustment" means:
(A) An adjustment to one of the development standards listed in subsection (4) of this
section where each discrete adjustment to a listed development standard that includes mul-
tiple component standards must be counted as an individual adjustment; or
(B) An adjustment to one of the development standards listed in subsection (5) of this
section where each discrete adjustment to a listed development standard that includes mul-
tiple component standards must be counted as an individual adjustment; and
(g) The application states how at least one of the following criteria apply:
(A) The adjustments will enable development of housing that is not otherwise feasible due
to cost or delay resulting from the unadjusted land use regulations;
(B) The adjustments will enable development of housing that reduces the sale or rental
prices per residential unit;
(C) The adjustments will increase the number of housing units within the application;
(D) All of the units in the application are subject to an affordable housing covenant as
described in ORS 456.270 to 456.295, making them affordable to moderate income households
as defined in ORS 456.270 for a minimum of 30 years;
(E) At least 20 percent of the units in the application are subject to an affordable housing
covenant as described in ORS 456.270 to 456.295, making them affordable to low income
households as defined in ORS 456.270 for a minimum of 60 years;
(F) The adjustments will enable the provision of accessibility or visitability features in
housing units that are not otherwise feasible due to cost or delay resulting from the unad-
justed land use regulations; or
(G) All of the units in the application are subject to a zero equity, limited equity, or
shared equity ownership model including resident -owned cooperatives and community land
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 19
trusts making them affordable to moderate income households as described in ORS 456.270
to 456.295 for a period of 90 years.
(3) A decision on an application for an adjustment made under this section is a limited
land use decision. Only the applicant may appeal the decision. No notice of the decision is
required if the application is denied, other than notice to the applicant. In implementing this
subsection, a local government may:
(a) Use an existing process, or develop and apply a new process, that complies with the
requirements of this subsection; or
(b) Directly apply the process set forth in this subsection.
(4) A local government shall grant an adjustment to the following development standards:
(a) Side or rear setbacks, for an adjustment of not more than 10 percent.
(b) For an individual development project, the common area, open space or area that
must be landscaped on the same lot or parcel as the proposed housing, for a reduction of
not more than 25 percent.
(c) Parking minimums.
(d) Minimum lot sizes, not more than a 10 percent adjustment, and including not more
than a 10 percent adjustment to lot widths or depths.
(e) Maximum lot sizes, not more than a 10 percent adjustment, including not more than
a 10 percent adjustment to lot width or depths and only if the adjustment results in:
(A) More dwelling units than would be allowed without the adjustment; and
(B) No reduction in density below the minimum applicable density.
(f) Building lot coverage requirements for up to a 10 percent adjustment.
(g) For manufactured dwelling parks, middle housing as defined in ORS 197A.420, multi-
family housing and mixed -use residential housing:
(A) Requirements for. bicycle parking that establish:
(i) The minimum number of spaces for use by the residents of the project, provided the
application includes at least one-half space per residential unit; or
(ii) The location of the spaces, provided that lockable, covered bicycle parking spaces are
within or adjacent to the residential development;
(B) For uses other than cottage clusters, as defined in ORS 197A.420 (1)(c)(D), building
height maximums that:
(i) Are in addition to existing applicable height bonuses, if any; and
(ii) Are not more than an .increase of the greater of:
(I) One story; or
(II) A 20 percent increase to base zone height with rounding consistent with methodology
outlined in city code, if any;
(C) Unit density maximums, not more than an amount necessary to account for other
adjustments under this section; and
(D) Prohibitions, for the ground floor of a mixed -use building, against:
(i) Residential uses except for one face of the building that faces the street and is within
20 feet of the street; and
(ii) Nonresidential active uses that support the residential uses of the building, including
lobbies, day care, passenger loading, community rooms, exercise facilities, offices, activity
spaces or live -work spaces, except for active uses in specifically and clearly defined mixed
use areas or commercial corridors designated by local governments.
(5) A local government shall grant an adjustment to design standards that regulate:
(a) Facade materials, color or pattern.
(b) Facade articulation.
(c) Roof forms and materials.
(d) Entry and garage door materials.
(e) Garage door orientation, unless the building is adjacent to or across from a school
or public park.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 20
(f) Window materials, except for bird -safe glazing requirements.
(g) Total window area, for up to a 30 percent adjustment, provided the application in-
cludes at least 12 percent of the total facade as window area.
(h) For manufactured dwelling parks, middle housing as defined in ORS 197A.420, multi-
family housing and mixed -use residential:
(A) Building orientation requirements, not including transit street orientation require-
ments.
(B) Building height transition requirements, not more than a 50 percent adjustment from
the base zone.
(C) Requirements for balconies and porches.
(D) Requirements for recesses and offsets.
SECTION 39. Mandatory adjustments exemption process. (1) A local government may
apply to the Housing Accountability and Production Office for an exemption to section 38 of
this 2024 Act only as provided in this section. After the application is made, section 38 of this
2024 Act does not apply to the applicant until the office denies the application or revokes the
exemption.
(2) To qualify for an exemption under this section, the local government must demon-
strate that:
(a) The local government reviews requested design and development adjustments for all
applications for the development of housing that are under the jurisdiction of that local
government;
(b) All listed development and design adjustments under section 38 (4) and (5) of this 2024
Act are eligible for an adjustment under the local government's process; and
(c)(A) Within the previous 5 years the city has approved 90 percent of received adjust-
ment requests; or
(B) The adjustment process is flexible and accommodates project needs as demonstrated
by testimonials of housing developers who have utilized the adjustment process within the
previous five years.
(3) Upon receipt of an application under this section, the office shall allow for public
comment on the application for a period of no less than 45 days. The office shall enter a final
order on the adjustment exemption within 120 days of receiving the application. The approval
of an application may not be appealed.
(4) In approving an exemption, the office may establish conditions of approval requiring
that the city demonstrate that it continues to meet the criteria under subsection (2) of this
section.
(5) Local governments with an approved or pending exemption under this section shall
clearly and consistently notify applicants, including prospective applicants seeking to request
an adjustment, that are engaged in housing development:
(a) That the local government is employing a local process in lieu of section 38 of this
2024 Act;
(b) Of the development and design standards for which an applicant may request an ad-
justment in a housing development application; and
(c) Of the applicable criteria for the adjustment application.
(6) In response to a complaint and following an investigation, the office may issue an
order revoking an exemption issued under this section if the office determines that the local
government is:
(a) Not approving adjustments as required by the local process or the terms of the ex-
emption;
(b) Engaging in a pattern or practice of violating housing -related statutes or imple-
menting policies that create unreasonable cost or delays to housing production under ORS
197.320 (13)(a); or
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 21
(c) Failing to comply with conditions of approval adopted under subsection (4) of this
section.
SECTION 40. Temporary exemption authority. Before January 1, 2025, notwithstanding
section 39 of this 2024 Act:
(1) Cities may deliver applications for exemption under section 39 of this 2024 Act to the
Department of Land Conservation and Development; and
(2) The Department of Land Conservation and Development may perform any action that
the Housing Accountability and Production Office may take under section 39 of this 2024 Act.
Decisions and actions of the department under this section are binding on the office.
SECTION 41. Reporting. (1) A city required to provide a report under ORS 197A.110 shall
include as part of that report information reasonably requested from the Department of
Land Conservation and Development on residential development produced through approvals
of adjustments granted under section 38 of this 2024 Act. The department may not develop
a separate process for collecting this data or otherwise place an undue burden on local gov-
ernments.
(2) On or before September 15 of each even -numbered year, the department shall provide
a report to an interim committee of the Legislative Assembly related to housing in the
manner provided in ORS 192.245 on the data collected under subsection (1) of this section.
The committee shall invite the League of Oregon Cities to provide feedback on the report
and the efficacy of section 38 of this 2024 Act.
SECTION 42. Operative date. Sections 38 to 41 of this 2024 Act become operative on
January 1, 2025.
SECTION 43. Sunset. Sections 38 to 41 of this 2024 Act are repealed on January 2, 2032.
LIMITED LAND USE DECISIONS
SECTION 44. ORS 197.015 is amended to read:
197.015. As used in ORS chapters 195, 196, 197 and 197A, unless the context requires otherwise:
(1) "Acknowledgment" means a commission order that certifies that a comprehensive plan and
land use regulations, land use regulation or plan or regulation amendment complies with the goals
or certifies that Metro land use planning goals and objectives, Metro regional framework plan,
amendments to Metro planning goals and objectives or amendments to the Metro regional frame-
work plan comply with the goals.
(2) "Board" means the Land Use Board of Appeals.
(3) "Carport" means a stationary structure consisting of a roof with its supports and not more
than one wall, or. storage cabinet substituting for a wall, and used for sheltering a motor vehicle.
(4) "Commission" means the Land Conservation and Development Commission.
(5) "Comprehensive plan" means a generalized, coordinated land use map and policy statement
of the governing body of a local government that interrelates all functional and natural systems and
activities relating to the use of lands, including but not limited to sewer and water systems, trans-
portation systems, educational facilities, recreational facilities, and natural resources and air and
water quality management programs. "Comprehensive" means all-inclusive, both in terms of the
geographic area covered and functional and natural activities and systems occurring in the area
covered by the plan. "General nature" means a summary of policies and proposals in broad catego-
ries and does not necessarily indicate specific locations of any area, activity or use. A plan is "co-
ordinated" when the needs of all levels of governments, semipublic and private agencies and the
citizens of Oregon have been considered and accommodated as much as possible. "Land" includes
water, both surface and subsurface, and the air.
(6) "Department" means the Department of Land Conservation and Development.
(7) "Director" means the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development.
(8) "Goals" means the mandatory statewide land use planning standards adopted by the com-
mission pursuant to ORS chapters 195, 196, 197 and 197A.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 22
(9) "Guidelines" means suggested approaches designed to aid cities and counties in preparation,
adoption and implementation of comprehensive plans in compliance with goals and to aid state
agencies and special districts in the preparation, adoption and implementation of plans, programs
and regulations in compliance with goals. Guidelines are advisory and do not limit state agencies,
cities, counties and special districts to a single approach.
(10) "Land use decision":
(a) Includes:
(A) A final decision or determination made by a local government or special district that con-
cerns the adoption, amendment or application of-
(i) The goals;
(ii) A comprehensive plan provision;
(iii) A land use regulation; or
(iv) A new land use regulation;
(B) A final .decision or determination of a state agency other than the commission with respect
to which the agency is required to apply the goals; or
(C) A decision of a county planning commission made under ORS 433.763;
(b) Does not include a decision of a local government:
(A) That is made under land use standards that do not require interpretation or the exercise
of policy or legal judgment;
(B) That approves or denies a building permit issued under clear and objective land use stand-
ards;
(C) That is a limited land use decision;
(D) That determines final engineering design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair or
preservation of a transportation facility that is otherwise authorized by and consistent with the
comprehensive plan and land use regulations;
(E) That is an expedited land division as described in ORS 197.360;
(F) That approves, pursuant to ORS 480.450 (7), the siting, installation, maintenance or removal
of a liquefied petroleum gas container or receptacle regulated exclusively by the State Fire Marshal
under ORS 480.410 to 480.460;
(G) That approves or denies approval of a final subdivision or partition plat or that determines
whether a final subdivision or partition plat substantially conforms to the tentative subdivision or
partition plan; or
(H) That a proposed state agency action subject to ORS 197.180 (1) is compatible with the ac-
knowledged comprehensive plan and land use regulations implementing the plan, .if:
(i) The local government has already made a land use decision authorizing a use or activity that
encompasses the proposed state agency action;
60 The use or activity that would be authorized, funded or undertaken by the proposed state
agency action is allowed without review under the acknowledged comprehensive plan and land use
regulations implementing the plan; or
(iii) The use or activity that would be authorized, funded or undertaken by the proposed state
agency action requires a future land use review under the acknowledged comprehensive plan and
land use regulations implementing the plan;
(c) Does not include a decision by a school district to close a school;
(d) Does not include, except as provided in ORS 215.213 (13)(c) or 215.283 (6)(c), authorization
of an outdoor mass gathering as defined in ORS 433.735, or other gathering of fewer than 3,000
persons that is not anticipated to continue for more than 120 hours in any three-month period; and
` (e) Does not include:
(A) A writ of mandamus issued by a circuit court in accordance with ORS 215.429 or 227.179;
(B) Any local decision or action taken on an application subject to ORS 215.427 or 227.178 after
a petition for a writ of mandamus has been filed under ORS 215.429 or 227.179; or
(C) A state agency action subject to ORS 197.180 (1), if:
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 23
(i) The local government with land use jurisdiction over a use or activity that would be au-
thorized, funded or undertaken by the state agency as a result of the state agency action has al-
ready made a land use decision approving the use or activity; or
(ii) A use or activity that would be authorized, funded or undertaken by the state agency as a
result of the state agency action is allowed without review under the acknowledged comprehensive
plan and land use regulations implementing the plan.
(11) "Land use regulation" means any local government zoning ordinance, land division ordi-
nance adopted under ORS 92.044 or 92.046 or similar general ordinance establishing standards for
implementing a comprehensive plan.
(12)(a) "Limited land use decisionTI
VaA means a final decision or determination made by a local government pertaining to a site
within an urban growth boundary that concerns:
(A) The approval or denial of a tentative subdivision or partition plan, as described in ORS
92.040 (1).
(B) The approval or denial of an application based on discretionary standards designed to reg-
ulate the physical characteristics of a use permitted outright, including but not limited to site re-
view and design review.
(C) The approval or denial of an application for a replat.
(D) The approval or denial of an application for a property line adjustment.
(E) The approval or denial of an application for an extension, alteration or expansion of
a nonconforming use.
(b) "Limited land use decision" does not mean a final decision made by a local government
pertaining to a site within an urban growth boundary that concerns approval or denial of a final
subdivision or partition plat or that determines whether a final subdivision or partition plat sub-
stantially conforms to the tentative subdivision or partition plan.
(13) "Local government" means any city, county or Metro or an association of local govern-
ments performing land use planning functions under ORS 195.025.
(14) "Metro" means a metropolitan service district organized under ORS chapter 268.
(15) "Metro planning goals and objectives" means the land use goals and objectives that Metro
may adopt under ORS 268.380 (1)(a). The goals and objectives do not constitute a comprehensive
plan.
(16) "Metro regional framework plan" means the regional framework plan required by the 1992
Metro Charter or its separate components. Neither the regional framework plan nor its individual
components constitute a comprehensive plan.
(17) "New land use regulation" means a land use regulation other than an amendment to an
acknowledged land use -regulation adopted by a local government that already has a comprehensive
plan and land regulations acknowledged under ORS 197.251.
(18) "Person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, association, governmental subdi-
vision• or agency or public or private organization of any kind. The Land Conservation and Devel-
opment Commission or its designee is considered a person for purposes of appeal under ORS
chapters 195, 197 and 197A.
(19) "Special district" means any unit of local government, other than a city, county, Metro or
an association of local governments performing land use planning functions under ORS 195.025, au-
thorized and regulated by statute and includes but is not limited to water control districts, domestic
water associations and water cooperatives, irrigation districts, port districts, regional air quality
control authorities, fire districts, school districts, hospital districts, mass transit districts and sani-
tary districts.
(20) "Urban growth boundary" means an acknowledged urban growth boundary contained in a
city or county comprehensive plan or adopted by Metro under ORS 268.390 (3).
(21) "Urban unincorporated community" means an area designated in a county's acknowledged
comprehensive plan as an urban unincorporated community after December 5, 1994.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 24
(22) "Voluntary association of local governments" means a regional planning agency in this
state officially designated by the Governor pursuant to the federal Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-95 as a regional clearinghouse.
(23) "Wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water
at a frequency and duration that are sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
SECTION 45. ORS 197.195 is amended to read:
197.195. (1) A limited land use decision shall be consistent with applicable provisions of city or
county comprehensive plans and land use regulations. Such a decision may include conditions au-
thorized by law. Within two years of September 29, 1991, cities and counties shall incorporate all
comprehensive plan standards applicable to limited land use decisions into their land use regu-
lations. A decision to incorporate all, some, or none of the applicable comprehensive plan standards
into land use regulations shall be undertaken as a post -acknowledgment amendment under ORS
197.610 to 197.625. If a city or county does not incorporate its comprehensive plan provisions into
its land use regulations, the comprehensive plan provisions may not be used as a basis for a decision
by the city or county or on appeal from that decision.
(2) A limited land use decision is not subject to the requirements of ORS 197.797.
(3) A limited land use decision is- subject to the requirements of paragraphs (a) to (c) of this
subsection.
(a) In making a limited land use decision, the local government shall follow the applicable pro-
cedures contained within its acknowledged comprehensive plan and land use regulations and other
applicable legal requirements.
(b) For limited land use decisions, the local government shall provide written notice to owners
of property within 100 feet of the entire contiguous site for which the application is made. The list
shall be compiled from the most recent property tax assessment roll. For purposes of review, this
requirement shall be deemed met when the local government can provide an affidavit or other cer-
tification that such notice was given. Notice shall also be provided to any neighborhood or com-
munity organization recognized by the governing body and whose boundaries include the site.
(c) The notice and procedures used by local government shall:
(A) Provide a 14-day period for submission of written comments prior to the decision;
(B) State that issues which may provide the basis for an appeal to the Land Use Board of Ap-
peals shall be raised in writing prior to the expiration of the comment period. Issues shall be raised
with sufficient specificity to enable the decision maker to respond to the issue;
(C) List, by commonly used citation, the applicable criteria for the decision;
(D) Set forth the street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject
property;
(E) State the place, date and time that comments are due;
(F) State that copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for review, and
that copies can be obtained at cost;
(G) Include the name and phone number of a local government contact person;
(H) Provide notice of the decision to the applicant and any person who submits comments under
subparagraph (A) of this paragraph. The notice of decision must include an explanation of appeal
rights; and
(I) Briefly summarize the local decision making process for the limited land use decision being
made.
(4) Approval or denial of a limited land use decision shall be based upon and accompanied by
a brief statement that explains the criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision, states
the facts relied upon in rendering the decision and explains the justification for the decision based
on the criteria, standards and facts set forth.
(5) A local government may provide for a hearing before the local government on appeal of a
limited land use decision under this section. The hearing may be limited to the record developed
pursuant to the initial hearing under subsection (3) of this section or may allow for the introduction
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 25
of additional testimony or evidence. A hearing on appeal that allows the introduction of additional
testimony or evidence shall comply with the requirements of ORS 197.797. Written notice of the
decision rendered on appeal shall be given to all parties who appeared, either orally or in writing,
before the hearing. The notice of decision shall include an explanation of the rights of each party
to appeal the decision.
(6) A city shall apply the procedures in this section, and only the procedures in this
section, to a limited land use decision, even if the city has not incorporated limited land use
decisions into land use regulations, as required by ORS 197.646 (3), except that a limited land
use decision that is made under land use standards that do not require interpretation or the
exercise of policy or legal judgment may be made by city staff using a ministerial process.
SECTION 45a. Section 46 of this 2024 Act is added to and made a part of ORS chapter
197.
SECTION 46. Applicability of limited land use decision to housing development. (1) The
Housing Accountability and Production Office may approve a hardship exemption or time
extension to ORS 197.195 (6), during which time ORS 197.195 (6) does not apply to decisions
by a local government.
(2) The office may grant an exemption or time extension only if the local government
demonstrates that a substantial hardship would result from the increased costs or staff ca-
pacity needed to implement procedures as required under ORS 197.195 (6).
(3) The office shall review exemption or time extension requests under the deadlines
provided in section 39 (3) of this 2024 Act.
SECTION 47. Sunset. Section 46 of this 2024 Act is repealed on January 2, 2032.
SECTION 47a. _Operative date. Section 46 of this 2024 Act and the amendments to ORS
197.015 and 197.195 by sections 44 and 45 of this 2024 Act become operative on January 1, 2025.
ONE-TIME SITE ADDITIONS TO URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES
SECTION 48. Sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act are added to and made a part of ORS
chapter 197A.
SECTION 49. Definitions. As used in sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act:
(1) "Net residential acre" means an acre of residentially designated buildable land, not
including rights of way for streets, roads or utilities or areas not designated for development
due to natural resource protections or environmental constraints.
(2) "Site" means a lot or parcel or contiguous lots or parcels, or both, with or without
common ownership.
SECTION 50. City addition of sites outside of Metro. (1) Notwithstanding any other pro-
vision of ORS chapter 197A, a city outside of Metro may add a site to the city's urban growth
boundary under sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act, if. _
(a) The site is adjacent to the existing urban growth boundary of the city or is separated
from the existing urban growth boundary by only a street or road;
(b) The site is:
(A) Designated as an urban reserve under ORS 197A.230 to 197A.250, including a site
whose designation is adopted under ORS 197.652 to 197.658;
(B) Designated as nonresource land; or
(C) Subject to an acknowledged exception to a statewide land use planning goal relating
to farmland or forestland;
(c) The city has not previously adopted an urban growth boundary amendment or ex-
change under sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act;
(d) The city has demonstrated a need for the addition under section 52 of this 2024 Act;
(e) The city has requested and received an application as required under sections 53 and
54 of this 2024 Act;
(f) The total acreage of the site:
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 26
(A) For a city with a population of 25,000 or greater, does not exceed 100 net residential
acres; or
(B) For a city with a population of less than 25,000, does not exceed 50 net residential
acres; and
(g)(A) The city has adopted a binding conceptual plan for the site that satisfies the re-
quirements of section 55 of this 2024 Act; or
(B) The added site does not exceed 15 net residential acres and satisfies the requirements
of section 56 of this 2024 Act.
(2) A county shall approve an amendment to an urban growth boundary made under this
section that complies with sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act and shall cooperate with a city
to facilitate the coordination of functions under ORS 195.020 to facilitate the city's
annexation and the development of the site. The county's decision is not a land use decision.
(3) Notwithstanding ORS 197.626, an action by a local government under sections 49 to
59 of this 2024 Act is not a land use decision as defined in ORS 197.015.
SECTION 51. Petition for additions of sites to Metro urban growth boundary. (1) A city
within Metro may petition Metro to add a site within the Metro urban growth boundary if
the site:
(a) Satisfies the requirements of section 50 (1) of this 2024 Act; and
(b) Is designated as an urban reserve.
(2)(a) Within 120 days of receiving a petition under this section, Metro shall determine
whether the site would substantially comply with the applicable provisions of sections 49 to
59 of this 2024 Act.
(b) If Metro determines that a petition does not substantially comply, Metro shall:
(A) Notify the city of deficiencies in the petition, specifying sufficient detail to allow the
city to remedy any deficiency in a subsequent resubmittal; and
(B) Allow the city to amend its conceptual plan and resubmit it as a petition to Metro
under this section.
(c) If Metro determines that a petition does comply, notwithstanding any other provision
of ORS chapter 197A, Metro shall adopt amendments to its urban growth boundary to include
the site in the petition, unless the amendment would result in more than 300 total net resi-
dential acres added under this subsection.
(3) If the net residential acres included in petitions that Metro determines are in com-
pliance on or before July 1, 2025, total less than 300 net residential acres, Metro shall adopt
amendments to its urban growth boundary under subsection (2)(c) of this section:
(a) On or before November 1, 2025, for all petitions deemed compliant on or before July
1, 2025; or
(b) Within 120 days after a petition is deemed compliant after July 1, 2025, in the order
in which the petitions are received.
(4) If the net residential acres included in petitions that Metro determines are in com-
pliance on or before July 1, 2025, total 300 or more net residential acres, on or before January
1, 2027, Metro shall adopt amendments to its urban growth boundary under subsection (2)(c)
of this section to include the sites in those petitions that Metro determines will:
(a) Best comply with the provisions of section 55 of this 2024 Act; and
(b) Maximize the development of needed housing.
(5) Metro may not conduct a hearing to review or select petitions or adopt amendments
to its urban growth boundary under this section.
SECTION 52. City demonstration of need. A city may not add, or petition to add, a site
under sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act, unless:
(1) The city has demonstrated a need for additional land based on the following factors:
(a)(A) In the previous 20 years there have been no urban growth boundary expansions for
residential use adopted by a city or by Metro in a location adjacent to the city; and
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 27
(B) The city does not have within the existing urban growth boundary an undeveloped,
contiguous tract that is zoned for residential use that is larger than 20 net residential acres;
or
(b) Within urban growth boundary expansion areas for residential use adopted by the city
over the previous 20 years, or by Metro in locations adjacent to the city, 75 percent of the
lands either:
(A) Are developed; or
(B) Have an acknowledged comprehensive plan with land use designations in preparation
for annexation and have a public facilities plan and associated financing plan.
(2) The city has demonstrated a need for affordable housing, based on:
(a) Having a greater percentage of severely cost -burdened households than the average
for this state based on the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data from the
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development; or
(b) At least 25 percent of the renter households in the city being severely rent burdened
as indicated under the most recent housing equity indicator data under ORS 456.602 (2)(g).
SECTION 53. City solicitation of site applications. (1). Before a city may select a site for
inclusion within the city's or Metro's urban growth boundary under sections 49 to 59 of this
2024 Act, a city must provide public notice that includes:
(a) The city's intention to select a site for inclusion within the city's urban growth
boundary.
(b) Each basis under which the city has determined that it qualifies to include a site
under section 52 of this section.
(c) A deadline for submission of applications under this section that is at least 45 days
following the date of the notice.
(d) A description of the information, form and format required of an application, includ-
ing the requirements of section 55 (2) of this 2024 Act.
(2) A copy of the notice of intent under this section must be provided to:
(a) Each county in which the city resides;
(b) Each special district providing urban services within the city's urban growth bound-
ary;
(c) The Department of Land Conservation and Development; and
(d) Metro, if the city is within Metro.
SECTION 54. City review of site applications. (1) After the deadline for submission of
applications established under section 55 of this 2024 Act, the city shall:
(a) Review applications filed for compliance with sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act.
(b) For each completed application that complies with sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act,
provide notice to the residents of the proposed site area who were not signatories to the
application.
(c) Provide opportunities for public participation in selecting a site, including, at least:
(A) One public comment period;
(B)(i) One meeting of the city's planning commission at which public testimony is con-
sidered;
(ii) One meeting of the city's council at which public testimony is considered; or
(iii) One public open house; and
(C) Notice on the city's website or published in a paper of record at least 14 days before:
(i) A meeting under subparagraph (B) of this paragraph; and
(ii) The beginning of a comment period under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.
(d) Consult with, request necessary information from and provide the opportunity for
written comment from:
(A) The owners of each lot or parcel within the site;
(B) If the city does not currently exercise land use jurisdiction over the entire site, the
governing body of each county with land use jurisdiction over the site;
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 28
(C) Any special district that provides urban services to the site; and
(D) Any public or private utility that provides utilities to the site.
(2) An application filed under this section must:
(a) Be completed for each property owner or group of property owners that are proposing
an urban growth boundary amendment under sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act;
(b) Be in writing in a form and format as required by the city;
(c) Specify the lots or parcels that are the subject of the application;
(d) Be signed by all owners of lots or parcels included within the application; and
(e) Include each owner's signed consent to annexation of the properties if the site is
added to the urban growth boundary.
(3) If the city has received approval from all property owners of such lands, in writing
in a form and format specified by the city, the governing body of the city may select an ap-
plication and the city shall adopt a conceptual plan as described in section 55 of this 2024
Act for all or a portion of the lands contained within the application.
(4) A conceptual plan adopted under subsection (3) of this section must include findings
identifying reasons for inclusion of lands within the conceptual plan and reasons why lands,
if any, submitted as part of an application that was partially approved were not included
within the conceptual plan.
SECTION 55. Conceptual plan for added sites. (1) As used in this section:
(a) "Affordable units" means residential units described in subsection (3)(f)(A) or (4) of
this section.
(b) "Market rate units" means residential units other than affordable units.
(2) Before adopting an urban growth boundary amendment under section 50 of this 2024
Act or petitioning Metro under section 51 of this 2024 Act, for a site larger than 15 net res-
idential acres; a city shall adopt.a binding conceptual plan as an amendment to its compre-
hensive plan.
(3) The conceptual plan must:
(a) Establish the total net residential acres within the site and must require for those
residential areas:
(A) A diversity of housing types and sizes, including middle housing, accessible housing
and other needed housing;
(B) That the development will be on lands zoned for residential or mixed -use residential
uses; and
(C) The development will be built at net residential densities not less than:
(i) Seventeen dwelling units per net residential acre if sited within the Metro urban
growth boundary;
(ii) Ten units .per net residential acre if sited in a city with a population of 30,000 or
greater;
(iii) Six units per net residential acre if sited in a city with a population of 2,500 or
greater and less than 30,000; or
(iv) Five units per net residential acre if sited in a city with a population less than 2,500;
(b) Designate within the site:
(A) Recreation and open space lands; and
(B) Lands for commercial uses, either separate or as a mixed use, that:
(i) Primarily serve the immediate surrounding housing;
(ii) Provide goods and services at a smaller scale than provided on typical lands zoned for
commercial use; and
(iii) Are provided at the minimum amount necessary to support and integrate viable
commercial and residential uses;
(c) If the city has a population of 5,000 or greater, include a transportation network for
the site that provides diverse transportation options, including walking, bicycling and transit
use if public transit services are available, as well as sufficient connectivity to existing and
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 29
planned transportation network facilities as shown in the local government's transportation
system plan as defined in Land Conservation and Development Commission rules;
(d) Demonstrate that protective measures will be applied to the site consistent with the
statewide land use planning goals for:
(A) Open spaces, scenic and historic areas or natural resources;
(B) Air, water and land resources quality;
(C) Areas subject to natural hazards;
(D) The Willamette River Greenway;
(E) Estuarine resources;
(F) Coast shorelands; or
(G) Beaches and dunes;
(e) Include a binding agreement among the city, each owner within the site and any other
necessary public or private utility provider, local government or district, as defined in ORS
195.060, or combination of local governments and districts that the site will be served with
all necessary urban services as defined in ORS 195.065, or an equivalent assurance; and
(f) Include requirements that ensure that:
(A) At least 30 percent of the residential units are subject to affordability restrictions,
including but not limited to affordable housing covenants, as described in ORS 456.270 to
456.295, that require for a period of not less than 60 years that the units be:
(i) Available for rent, with or without government assistance, by households with an in-
come of 80 percent or less of the area median income as defined in ORS 456.270; or
(ii) Available for purchase, with or without government assistance, by households with
an income of 130 percent or less of the area median income;
(B) The construction of all affordable units has commenced before the city issues cer-
tificates of occupancy to the last 15 percent of market rate units;
(C) All common areas and amenities are equally available to residents of affordable units
and of market rate units and properties designated for affordable units are dispersed
throughout the site; and
(D) The requirement for affordable housing units is recorded before the building permits
are issued for any property within the site, and the requirements contain financial penalties
for noncompliance.
(4) A city may require greater affordability requirements for residential units than are
required under subsection (3)(f)(A) of this section, provided that the city significantly and
proportionally offsets development costs related to:
(a) Permits or fees;
(b) System development charges;
(c) Property taxes; or
(d) Land acquisition and predevelopment costs.
SECTION 56. Alternative for small additions. (1) A city that intends to add 15 net resi-
dential acres or less is not required to adopt a conceptual plan under section 55 of this 2024
Act if the city has entered into:
(a) Enforceable and recordable agreements with each landowner of a property within the
site to ensure that the site will comply with the affordability requirements described in sec-
tion 55 (3)(f) of this 2024 Act; and
(b) A binding agreement with each owner within the site and any other necessary public
or private utility provider, local government or district, as defined in ORS 195.060, or com-
bination of local governments and districts to ensure that the site will be served with all
necessary urban services as defined in ORS 195.065.
(2) This section does not apply to a city within Metro.
SECTION 57. Department approval of site additions. (1) Within 21 days after the adoption
of an amendment to an urban growth boundary or the adoption or amendment of a concep-
tual plan under sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act, and the approval by a county if required
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 30
under section 50 (2) of this 2024 Act, the conceptual plan or amendment must be submitted
to the Department of Land Conservation and Development for review. The submission must
be made by:
(a) The city, for an amendment under section 50 or 58 of this 2024 Act; or
(b) Metro, for an amendment under section 51 or 58 of this 2024 Act.
(2) Within 60 days after receiving a submittal under subsection (1) of this section, the
department shall:
(a) Review the submittal for compliance with the provisions of sections 49 to 59 of this
2024 Act.
(b)(A) If the submittal substantially complies with the provisions of sections 49 to 59 of
this 2024 Act, issue an order approving the submittal; or
(B) If the submittal does not substantially comply with the provisions of sections 49 to
59 of this 2024 Act, issue an order remanding the submittal to the city or to Metro with a
specific determination of deficiencies in the submittal and with sufficient detail to identify a
specific remedy for any deficiency in a subsequent resubmittal.
(3) If a conceptual plan is remanded to Metro under subsection (2)(b) of this section:
(a) The department shall notify the city; and
(b) The city may amend its conceptual plan and resubmit a petition to Metro under sec-
tion 51 of this 2024 Act.
(4) Judicial review of the department's order:
(a) Must be as a review of orders other than a contested case under ORS 183.484; and
(b) May be initiated only by the city or an owner of a proposed site.
(5) Following the approval of a submittal under this section, a local government must
include the added lands in any future inventory of buildable lands or determination of hous-
ing capacity under ORS 197A.270, 197A.280, 197A.335 or 197A.350.
SECTION 58. Alternative urban growth boundary land exchange. (1) In lieu of amending
its urban growth boundary under any other process provided by sections 49 to 59 of this 2024
Act, Metro or a city outside of Metro may amend its urban growth boundary to add one or
more sites described in section 51 (1)(a) and (b) of this 2024 Act to the urban growth bound-
ary and to remove one or more tracts of land from the urban growth boundary as provided
in this section.
(2) The acreage of the added site and removed lands must be roughly equivalent.
(3) The removed lands must have been zoned for residential uses.
(4) The added site must be zoned for residential uses at the same or greater density than
the removed lands.
(5)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, land may be removed from
an urban growth boundary under this section without landowner consent.
(b) A landowner may not appeal the removal of the landowner's land from an urban
growth boundary under this section unless the landowner agrees to enter into a recorded
agreement with Metro or the city in which the landowner would consent to annexation and
development of the land within 20 years if the land remains in the urban growth boundary.
(6) Review of an exchange of lands made under this section may only be made by:
(a) For cities outside of Metro, the county as provided in section 50 (2) of this 2024 Act
and by the Department of Land Conservation and Development, subject to judicial review,
as provided in section 57 of this 2024 Act; or
(b) For Metro, the Department of Land Conservation and Development, subject to judicial
review, as provided in section 57 of this 2024 Act.
(7) Sections 50 (1)(d) to (g), 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of this 2024 Act do not apply to a site
addition made under this section.
SECTION 59. Reporting on added sites. A city for which an amendment was made to an
urban growth boundary and approved under sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act shall submit a
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 31
report describing the status of development within the included area to the Department of
Land Conservation and Development every two years until:
(1) January 2, 2033; or
(2) The city determines that development consistent with the acknowledged conceptual
plan is deemed complete.
SECTION 60. Sunset. Sections 49 to 59 of this 2024 Act are repealed on January 2, 2033.
APPROPRIATIONS
SECTION 61. Appropriation and expenditure limitation to Department of Land Conser-
vation and Development. (1) In addition to and not in lieu of any other appropriation, there
is appropriated to the Department of Land Conservation and Development, for the biennium
ending June 30, 2025, out of the General Fund, the amount of $5,629,017, for deposit into the
Housing Accountability and Production Office Fund, established under section 4 of this 2024
Act, to take any action to implement sections 1 to 5, 16, 38 to 41, 46 and 49 to 59 of this 2024
Act and the amendments to ORS 183.471, 197.015, 197.195, 197.335, 215.427 and 227.178 by
sections 8, 9, 44, 45, 64 and 65 of this 2024 Act.
(2) In addition to and not in lieu of any other appropriation, there is appropriated to the
Department of Land Conservation and Development, for the biennium ending June 30, 2025,
out of the General Fund, the amount of $5,000,000, for deposit into the Housing Account-
ability and Production Office Fund, established under section 4 of this 2024 Act, for the
Housing Accountability and Production Office, established under section 1 of this 2024 Act,
to provide technical assistance, including grants, under section 1 (2) of this 2024 Act and to
provide required studies under section 5 of this 2024 Act.
(3) Notwithstanding any other law limiting expenditures, the amount of $10,629,017 is es-
tablished for the biennium ending June 30, 2025, as the maximum amount for payment of
expenses by the Department of Land Conservation and Development from the Housing Ac-
countability and Production Office Fund established under section 4 of this 2024 Act.
SECTION 62. Appropriation and expenditure limitation to Housing and Community Ser-
vices Department. (1) In addition to and not in lieu of any other appropriation, there is ap-
propriated to the Housing and Community Services Department, for the biennium ending
June 30, 2025, out of the General Fund, the amount of $75,000,000, for deposit into the
Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund established under section 35 of this 2024 Act.
(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the General Fund appropriation made to
the Housing and Community Services Department by section 1, chapter 390, Oregon Laws
2023, for the biennium ending June 30, 2025, is increased by $878,071 for administrative ex-
penses related to the Housing Project Revolving Loan Fund established under section 35 of
this 2024 Act.
(3) Notwithstanding any other law limiting expenditures, the amount of $24,750,000 is es-
tablished for the biennium ending June 30, 2025, as the maximum amount for payment of
expenses by the Housing and Community Services Department from the Housing Project
Revolving Loan Fund established under section 35 of this 2024 Act.
SECTION 63. Appropriation and expenditure limitation to Oregon Business Development
Department. (1) In addition to and not in lieu of any other appropriation, there is appropri-
ated to the Oregon Business Development Department, for the biennium ending June 30,
2025, out of the General Fund, the amount of $3,000,000, for deposit into the Housing
Infrastructure Support Fund established under section 14 of this 2024 Act.
(2) Notwithstanding any other law limiting expenditures, the amount of $3,000,000 is es-
tablished for the biennium ending June 30, 2025, as the maximum amount for payment of
expenses by the Oregon Business Development Department from the Housing Infrastructure
Support Fund established under section 14 of this 2024 Act.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 32
SECTION 63a. Expenditure limitation to Department of Consumer and Business Services.
Notwithstanding any other law limiting expenditures, the limitation on expenditures estab-
lished by section 1 (6), chapter 354, Oregon Laws 2023, for the biennium ending June 30, 2025,
as the maximum limit for payment of expenses from fees, moneys or other revenues, in-
cluding Miscellaneous Receipts, but excluding lottery funds and federal funds, collected or
received by the Department of Consumer and Business Services, for Building Codes Division,
is increased by $296,944, to support operations of the Housing Accountability and Production
Office established under section 1 of this 2024 Act.
CONFORMING AMENDMENTS
SECTION 64. ORS 197.335, as amended by section 17, chapter 13, Oregon Laws 2023, is
amended to read:
197.335. (1) [An order issued under ORS 197.328 and the copy of the order mailed] The Land
Conservation and Development Commission shall mail a copy of an enforcement order to the
local government, state agency or special district. An order must set forth:
(a) The nature of the noncompliance, including, but not limited to, the contents of the compre-
hensive plan or land use regulation, if any, of a local government that do not comply with the goals
or the contents of a plan, program or regulation affecting land use adopted by a state agency or
special district that do not comply with the goals. In the case of a pattern or practice of decision -
making, the order must specify the decision -making .that constitutes the pattern or practice, includ-
ing specific provisions the [Land Conservation and Development] commission believes are being
misapplied.
'(b) The specific lands, if any, within a local government for which the existing plan or land use
regulation, if any, does not comply with the goals.
(c) The corrective action decided upon by the commission, including the specific requirements,
with which the local government, state agency or special district must comply. In the case of a
pattern or practice of decision -making, the commission may require revisions to the comprehensive
plan, land use regulations or local procedures which the commission believes are necessary to cor-
rect the pattern or practice. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, except as provided in
subsection (3)(c) of this section, an enforcement order does not affect:
(A) Land use applications filed with a local government prior to the date of adoption of the
enforcement order unless specifically identified by the order;
(B) Land use approvals issued by a local government prior to the date of adoption of the
enforcement order; or
(C) The time limit for exercising land use approvals issued by a local government prior to the
date of adoption of the enforcement order.
(2) Judicial review of a final order of the commission is governed by the provisions of ORS
chapter 183 applicable to contested cases except as otherwise stated in this section. The
commission's final order must include a clear statement of findings which set forth the basis for the
order. Where a petition to review the order has been filed in the Court of Appeals, the commission
shall transmit to the court the entire administrative record of the proceeding under review.
Notwithstanding ORS 183.482 (3) relating to a stay of enforcement of an agency order, an appellate
court, before it may stay an order of the commission, shall give due consideration to the public in-
terest in the continued enforcement of the commission's order and may consider testimony or affi-
davits thereon. Upon review, an appellate court may affirm, reverse, modify or remand the order.
The court shall reverse, modify or remand the order only if it finds:
(a) The order to be unlawful in substance or procedure, but an error in procedure is not cause
for reversal, modification or remand unless the court finds that substantial rights of any party were
prejudiced thereby;
(b) The order to be unconstitutional;
(c) The order is invalid because it exceeds the statutory authority of the agency; or
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 33
(d) The order is not supported by substantial evidence in the whole record.
(3)(a) If the commission finds that in the interim period during which a local government, state
agency or special district would be bringing itself into compliance with the commission's order
[under ORS 197.320 or subsection (2) of this section] it would be contrary to the public interest in
the conservation or sound development of land to allow the continuation of some or all categories
of land use decisions or limited land use decisions, it shall, as part of its order, limit, prohibit or
require the approval by the local government of applications for subdivisions, partitions, building
permits, limited land use decisions or land use decisions until the plan, land use regulation or sub-
sequent land use decisions and limited land use decisions are brought into compliance. The com-
mission may issue an order that requires review of local decisions by a hearings officer or the
Department of Land Conservation and Development before the local decision becomes final.
(b) Any requirement under this subsection may be imposed only if the commission finds that the
activity, if continued, aggravates the goal, comprehensive plan or land use regulation violation and
that the requirement is necessary to correct the violation.
(c) The limitations on enforcement orders under subsection (1)(c)(B) of this section do not affect
the commission's authority to limit, prohibit or require application of specified criteria to subsequent
land use decisions involving land use approvals issued by a local government prior to the date of
adoption of the enforcement order.
(4) As part of its order [under ORS 197.320 or subsection (2) of this section], the commission may
withhold grant funds from the local government to which the order is directed. As part of an order
issued under this section, the commission may notify the officer responsible for disbursing state -
shared revenues to withhold that portion of state -shared revenues to which the local government is
entitled under ORS 221.770, 323.455, 366.762 and 366.800 and ORS chapter 471 which represents the
amount of state planning grant moneys previously provided the local government by the commission.
The officer responsible for disbursing state -shared revenues shall withhold state -shared revenues as
outlined in this section and shall release funds to the local government or department when notified
to so do by the commission or its designee. The commission may retain a portion of the withheld
revenues to cover costs of providing services incurred under the order, including use of a hearings
officer or staff resources to monitor land use decisions and limited land use decisions or conduct
hearings. The remainder of the funds withheld under this provision shall be released to the local
government upon completion of requirements of the [commission] enforcement order.
(5)(a) As part of its order under this section, the commission may notify the officer responsible
for disbursing funds from any grant or loan made by a state agency to withhold such funds from a
special district to which the order is directed. The officer responsible for disbursing funds shall
withhold funds as outlined in this section and shall release funds to the special district or depart-
ment when notified to do* so by the commission.
(b) The commission may retain a portion of the funds withheld to cover costs of providing ser-
vices incurred under the order, including use of a hearings officer or staff resources to monitor land
use decisions and limited land use decisions'or conduct hearings. The remainder of the funds with-
held under this provision shall be released to the special district upon completion of the require-
ments of the commission order.
(6) As part of its order under this section, upon fording a city failed to comply with ORS 197.320
(13), the commission may, consistent with the principles in ORS 197A.130 (1), require the city to:
(a) Comply with the housing acceleration agreement under ORS 197A.130 (6).
(b) Take specific actions that are part of the city's housing production strategy under ORS
197A.100.
(c) Impose appropriate models that have been developed by department, including model ordi-
nances, procedures, actions or anti -displacement measures.
(d) Reduce maximum timelines for review of needed housing or specific types of housing or
affordability levels, [including] through ministerial approval or any other expedited existing approval
process.
(e) Take specific actions to waive or amend local ordinances.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 34
(f) Forfeit grant funds under subsection (4) of this section.
(7) The commission may institute actions or proceedings for legal or equitable remedies in the
Circuit Court for Marion County or in the circuit court for the county to which the [commission's]
order is directed or within which all or a portion of the applicable city is located to enforce com-
pliance with the provisions of any order issued under this section or to restrain violations thereof.
Such actions or proceedings may be instituted without the necessity of prior agency notice, hearing
[and] or order on an alleged violation.
(8) As used in this section, "enforcement order" or "order" means an order issued under
ORS 197.320 or section 3 of this 2024 Act as may be modified on appeal under subsection (2)
of this section.
SECTION 65. ORS 183.471 is amended to read:
183.471. (1) When an agency issues a final order in a contested case, the agency shall maintain
the final order in a digital format that:
(a) Identifies the final order by the date it was issued;
(b) Is suitable for indexing and searching; and
(c) Preserves the textual attributes of the document, including the manner in which the docu-
ment is paginated and any boldfaced, italicized or underlined writing in the document.
(2) The Oregon State Bar may request that an agency provide the Oregon State Bar, or its
designee, with electronic copies of final orders issued by the agency in contested cases. The request
must be in writing. No later than 30 days after receiving the request, the agency, subject to ORS
192.338, 192.345 and 192.355, shall provide the Oregon State Bar, or its designee, with an electronic
copy of all final orders identified in the request.
(3) Notwithstanding ORS 192.324, an agency may not charge a. fee for the first two requests
submitted under this section in a calendar year. For any subsequent request, an agency may impose
a fee in accordance with ORS 192.324 to reimburse the agency for the actual costs of complying
with the request.
(4) For purposes of this section, a final order entered in a contested case by an administrative
law judge under ORS 183.625 (3) is a final order issued by the agency that authorized the adminis-
trative law judge to conduct the hearing.
(5) This section does not apply to final orders by default issued under ORS 183.417 (3) or to final
orders issued in contested cases by:
(a) The Department of Revenue;
(b) The State Board of Parole and Post -Prison Supervision;
(c) The Department of Corrections;
(d) The Employment Relations Board;
(e) The Public Utility Commission of Oregon;
(f) The Oregon Health Authority;
(g) The Land Conservation and Development Commission, except for enforcement orders
under section 3 of this 2024 Act;
(h) The Land Use Board of Appeals;
(i) The Division of Child Support of the Department of Justice;
Q) The Department of Transportation, if the final order relates to the suspension, revocation or
cancellation of identification cards, vehicle registrations, vehicle titles or driving privileges or to
the assessment of taxes or stipulated settlements in the regulation of vehicle related businesses;
(k) The Employment Department or the Employment Appeals Board, if the final order relates to
benefits as defined in ORS 657.010;
(L) The Employment Department, if the final order relates to an assessment of unemployment
tax for which a hearing was not held;
(m) The Employment Department, if the final order relates to:
(A) Benefits, as defined in ORS 657B.010;
(B) Employer and employee contributions under ORS 657B.150 for which a hearing was not held;
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 35
(C) Employer -offered benefit plans approved under ORS 657B.210 or terminated under ORS
657B.220; or
(D) Employer assistance grants under ORS 657B.200; or
(n) The Department of Human Services, if the final order was not related to licensing or certif-
ication.
SECTION 66. ORS 455.770 is amended to read:
455.770. (1) In addition to any other authority and power granted to the Director of the De-
partment of Consumer and Business Services under ORS 446.003 to 446.200, 446.225 to 446.285,
446.395 to 446.420, 479.510 to 479.945, 479.995 and 480.510 to 480.670 and this chapter and ORS
chapters 447, 460 and 693 and sections 1 to 5 of this 2024 Act, with respect to municipalities,
building officials and inspectors, if the director has reason to believe that there is a failure to en-
force or a violation of any provision of the state building code or ORS 446.003 to 446.200, 446.225
to 446.285, 446.395 to 446.420, 479.510 to 479.945, 479.995 or 480.510 to 480.670 or this chapter or
ORS chapter 447, 460 or 693 or any rule adopted under those statutes, the director may:
(a) Examine building code activities of the municipality;
(b) Take sworn testimony; and
(c) With the authorization of the Office of the Attorney General, subpoena persons and records
to obtain testimony on official actions that were taken or omitted or to obtain documents otherwise
subject to public inspection under ORS 192.311 to 192.478.
(2) The investigative authority authorized in subsection (1) of this section covers the violation
or omission by a municipality related to enforcement of codes or administrative rules, certification
of inspectors or financial transactions dealing with permit' fees and surcharges under any of the
following circumstances when:
(a) The duties are clearly established by law, rule or agreement;
(b) The duty involves procedures for which the means and methods are clearly established by
law, rule or agreement; or
(c) The duty is described by clear performance standards.
(3) Prior to starting an investigation under subsection (1) of this section, the director shall no-
tify the municipality in writing setting forth the allegation and the rules or statutes pertaining to
the allegation and give the municipality 30 days to respond to the allegation. If the municipality
does not satisfy the director's concerns, the director may then commence an investigation.
(4) If the Department of Consumer and Business Services or the director directs corrective
action[, the following shall be done]:
(a) The corrective action [shall] must be in writing and served on the building official and the
chief executive officers of all municipalities affected;
(b) The corrective action [shall] must identify the facts and law relied upon for the required
action; and
(c) A reasonable time [shall] must be provided to the municipality for compliance.
(5) The director may revoke any authority of the municipality to administer any part of the state
building code or ORS 446.003 to 446.200, 446.225 to 446.285, 446.395 to 446.420, 479.510 to 479.945,
479.995 or 480.510 to 480.670 or this chapter or ORS chapter 447, 460 or 693 or any rule adopted
under those statutes if the director determines after a hearing conducted under ORS 183.413 to
183.497 that:
(a) All of the requirements of this section and ORS 455.775 and 455.895 were met; and
(b) The municipality did not comply with the corrective action required.
CAPTIONS
SECTION 67. The unit and section captions used in this 2024 Act are provided only for
the convenience of the reader and do not become part of the statutory law of this state or
express any legislative intent in the enactment of this 2024 Act.
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 36
EFFECTIVE DATE
SECTION 68. This 2024 Act takes effect on the 91st day after the date on which the 2024
regular session of the Eighty-second Legislative Assembly adjourns sine die.
Passed by Senate February 29, 2024
..................................................................................
Obadiah Rutledge, Secretary of Senate
..................................................................................
Rob Wagner, President of Senate
Passed by House March 4, 2024
..................................................................................
Dan Rayfield, Speaker of House
Received by Governor:
........................ M.,......................................................... 1 2024
Approved: ,
........................ M............................................................ 2024
..................................................................................
Tina Kotek, Governor
Filed in Office of Secretary of State:
........................ M.,.......................................................... 2024
...............................................................................
LaVonne Griffin-Valade, Secretary of State
Enrolled Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537-B) Page 37
pralliaCouncil Study Session
April 1, 2024
Agenda Item
Homeless Services Masterplan Subcommittee Interim Report
From
Linda Reid
Housing Program Manager
Contact
Linda.reid@ashland.or.us
Item Type
Requested by Council M Update ❑ Request for Direction ❑ Presentation ❑
SUMMARY
In November of 2023 the Council gave direction to the Housing and Human Services Committee to prepare a
draft masterplan to guide the City's investment in homeless services. The Council asked that the plan include
broad stakeholder input, and should identify the scope of the problems, gaps and shortcomings in the existing
resources and services, and an overview of other regional strategies and efforts by partner organizations to
address the needs of homeless populations throughout Jackson County.
To that end, the City advertised broadly to find volunteers to serve on a subcommittee devoted to this task. The
Subcommittee applicants were reviewed by the Housing and Human Services Committee and were appointed
at their regular meeting in January. The Homeless Services Masterplan Subcommittee (HSMS) has been
meeting twice a month since January 30th, and in that time has agreed to an approach, a timeline, and set of
tasks. The documents that detail those areas are attached to the Council Communication.
POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED
Regional Cooperation: including in support for public safety and homelessness.
BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The HSMS has identified an approach and a list of tasks to address how to approach this complex and wide-
ranging task. Given the time constraints and the limitations of a community led volunteer citizens
subcommittee, the approach and timeline provided to the Council presented are what the subcommittee has
identified as a reasonable and accomplishable plan of action. The Subcommittee members have appointed an
Executive Committee of three members to meet in-between meetings to set the meeting agendas and keep the
subcommittee on task and moving forward. The Executive Committee members are prepared to provide a
status report to the Council regarding the Subcommittee's approach, tasks, timeline and plan for community
engagement and gathering stakeholder input. Furthermore, the executive committee would welcome any
clarity or direction from the Council regarding the approach and timelines the HSMS has planned.
FISCAL IMPACTS
The Council did not allocate any funding to this activity. Additional investments may be needed to address any
action items that the Council may wish to take to address any gaps or resource needs identified through the
master planning document developed through this process.
Page 1of2
. Council Study Session
SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS
The Community Development Department will continue its collaboration with the HSMS to finalize the
process and prepare a masterplan for presentation to the Council at their final June meeting. Should it
be necessary to complete the project beyond the Council's original deadline, the HSMS may later
propose extending the limited duration subcommittee's term.
REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS
• HSMS memo: Approach and Tasks
• HSMS memo: Timeline Summary
Page 2 of 2
ASHLAND
Memo
DATE: February 28, 2024
TO: Homeless Services Masterplan Subcommittee
FROM: Executive Committee
RE: Approach, Task, and Timeline
Approach
The Subcommittee will gain an understanding of the level of homelessness and the
homeless response services and systems in Ashland and affecting Ashland.
The Subcommittee will prepare an inventory of local services and gather data currently
available about people experiencing homelessness.
The Subcommittee will prepare an outline for a "Money Map" to illustrate the current
investments in responding to the homeless crisis. NOTE: Time will not allow for
comprehensive data collection, but by providing an outline and some examples, the
Subcommittee's report will offer a framework for further fiscal analysis.
Within the time and resources allowed, the Subcommittee will consider the strengths
and weaknesses of the current homeless response system and gather perspectives from
a cross-section of the Ashland community about the problem and how the City of
Ashland can better address the complex issues of homelessness in Ashland.
The Subcommittee's findings, including the areas of greatest concern/need, current
strengths in the homeless response system, and potential opportunities will be included
in the Subcommittee Report.
Preliminary Outline of the Subcommittee Report:
1. The Players Addressing Homelessness
2. The Responsibilities of a Continuum of Care (COC)
3. Services Inventory
4. Data about People and Programs
5. Outline for a Money Map
6. Community Perspectives
7. Subcommittee Conclusions
Community Development Department
20 East Main Street Tel: 541.488.5305 .
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2059
ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 ,�
ASHLAND
Memo
The Subcommittee (at least in this phase) will not develop options for investing
resources, as identifying such options would be dependent on specific priorities or
desired outcomes/objectives.
After specific priorities or desired outcomes/objectives are identified, a second phase
could include an assets inventory, completion of the "money map," and researching best
practices to develop options built on those resources.
Tasks
1. UNDERSTAND THE PLAYERS ADDRESSING HOMELESSNESS
a. Language: Terms and Acronyms
b. Major Players and Roles, Resources, & Responsibilities re: Homelessness
i. Government
• Federal 0 State • County
• School District a Housing 0 City
Authority
ii. Coalitions, Task Forces, and Committees
1. Jackson County Continuum of Care (COC)
2. Jackson County Homeless Task Force
3. Ashland Housing & Social Services Commission
iii. Agencies, Organizations, and Programs
1. Homeless -Focused
e.g., ACCESS, OHRA, Rogue Retreat, Hearts with a Mission, St.
Vincent de Paul shelter, Magdalene Home, Maslow Project,
The Salvation Army Hope House
2. Aligned Social Services
e.g., Community Works, Family Nurturing Center, The Arc,
Unete
3. Other Service Providers
e.g., DHS, Health Care, Workforce Development Food Bank
4. Other Services
e.g., Faith -based, and community -based meal programs,
clothing closets, and other good works
2. UNDERSTAND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF A COC
CoC: Continuum of Care Program - HUD Exchange
Community Development Department
20 East Main Street Tel: 541.488.5305
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2059
ashlond.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 ,�
IT Y OF
�SHLAND
Memo
a. Organization
i. Governing Body and Operations
ii. Collaborative Applicant
b. Planning & Partnerships
i. Representation / Participation
ii. Annual Needs Assessment
iii. Homeless Response (plan/system)
c. Operating a Coordinated Entry System
i. CE Management Entity
ii. System Design
d. Operating an HMIS and Submitting Reports to HUD
i. Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)
ii. HMIS Lead Agency
iii. Reporting to HUD
1. Point -In -Time Count (PIT, sheltered and unsheltered)
2. Housing Inventory Count (HIC)
3. Longitudinal Systems Analysis (LSA)
4. System Performance Measures (SPMs)
5. Annual Performance Report (APR)
e. Evaluating HUD CoC-funded Programs and ESG-funded Programs
f. Identifying Priorities for Local HUD CoC Funding
g. Submitting Annual CoC Consolidated Application to HUD
h. Informing Consolidated Plans of Local Jurisdictions
3. PREPARE AN INVENTORY OF SERVICES
a. A matrix of homeless services:
i. Service Type
1. street outreach,
2. supportive services only,
3. emergency shelter,
Community Development Department
20 East Main Street Tel: 541.488.5305 W
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2059
ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900
r,}y A _.
Memo
ASH LAIV D
4. transitional housing,
5. rapid rehousing,
6. permanent supportive housing,
7. other permanent housing
ii. Populations served (men, women, families, DV survivors, youth,
chronically homeless, veterans, or other specific population)
iii. Services provided within each program (case management,
meals, childcare, education, transportation, etc.)
iv. Capacity (caseload, beds, households; and annual use rates)
b. A matrix of other (not homeless -specific) services
Note: gather from existing resource lists, as time and resources do not
allow the Subcommittee to ensure a comprehensive listing of community
services.
c. If time allows, complete an analysis of barriers to accessing services
(e.g., location/transportation, limited language accommodations, the
need for
a social security card, home address or proof of residency)
4. GATHER HMIS DATA ABOUT PEOPLE AND PROGRAMS
a. Numbers and Demographics (age, gender, race, and ethnicity, etc.)
i. People experiencing homelessness
ii. People assessed through the Coordinated Entry System
iii. People served by each homeless service type (outreach, shelter,
transitional housing, RRH, PSH, other permanent housing)
iv. Households and individuals moved into permanent housing
v. Households and individuals retaining permanent housing
b. Subpopulations
i. Veterans
ii. Families with Minor Children
iii. K-12 students experiencing homelessness and housing insecurity
iv. Fleeing Domestic Violence
v. Experiencing Chronic Homelessness
c. Other Information
i. Health Insurance
ii. Chronic health conditions
iii. Other, tba
Community Development Department
20 East Main Street Tel: 541.488.5305 .
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2059
ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 ,�
IF
ASHLAND
Memo
5. GATHER OTHER DATA ABOUT PEOPLE AND PROGRAMS
a. School District McKinney Vento Programs
b. Jackson County Housing Authority
c. Affordable Housing Inventory (by City and operator) and year of expiration
d. People served by emergency services (e.g., first responders, emergency
departments) who were identified as homeless, as a number and as a
percentage of those served.
6. PREPARE AN OUTLINE FOR A MONEY MAP
a. Government funds, sources, and how utilized
i. Federal, including HUD CoC, CDBG, public housing, DOJ, etc.
ii. State, including OHCS, DHS, DOC, etc.
iii. Local, including county and city
b. Annual budgets and funding sources for each homeless service
c. Governor's Executive Order funds / HB 5019, SB 5511, SB 5506
7. GATHER COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES
a. Questions / Topics of Inquiry (tentative)
i. What is the problem?
ii. What is the City of Ashland's role?
iii. Who else should have a role? And what is that role?
b. Representation (tentative)
i. Community Sectors
1. Businesses
2. Non-profit organizations
3. Faith -based organizations
4. Law Enforcement
5. Healthcare (mental, physical, behavioral)
6. Education (early learning, k-12, higher education)
7. Public Housing Authority
8. Affordable housing developers
9. Rental property management
10. Employment and workforce programs
ii. Individual Representation
1. People experiencing homelessness now
Community Development Department
20 East Main Street Tel: 541.488.5305 '
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2059
ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 ,�
Memo
ASHLAND
2. People who have experienced homelessness in the past
3. Diversity in racial and ethnic backgrounds
4. Diversity in ages f age groups
5. Diversity in gender identity and sexual orientation
6. Diversity in political viewpoints
7. Diversity in income levels
8. Diversity in residency in Ashland (new residents, long-term)
9. Diversity in household composition (singles, couples,
families)
b. Process (TBD)
1. Online surveys
2. Written surveys
3. Individual interviews
4. Focus groups
8. CONDUCT AN ANALYSIS OF STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, AND POTENTIAL
OPPORTUNITIES USING INFORMATION ABOUT:
a. Homeless Services
b. Other Community Resources
c. The Continuum of Care
d. Demographic and Service Data
e. Financial Investments
f. Community Perspectives
Community Development Department
20 East Main Street Tel: 541.488.5305
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2059
ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900
ASHLAND
Memo
Component
kfarnwtion
Who
28-Feb
2/29 HHSAC
3/5 city
F 12-Mar
27-Mar
3/UHHSAC
4/1-4/2
9-Apr
24-Apr
7-May
22-May
4-Jun
11-Jun
26-Jun
TBAHHSAC
TBACouncil
Council
C Council
.The Players
Name, purpose (role or mission statement),
Sta"
PRESENTATION
r3I2•`urctions,type ofgoverning body or
:The Players
(Addressing
Homelessness
3othonty,geographicarea served !city orcities,
Addressing
courty or counties, State, raton), website URL
Homelessness
jThe
Organization
PRESENTATION
PRESENTATION
Planning
�Responsibilitie
& DISCUSSION:
, DISCUSSION
s of a
Responsibilities
& SWOT
Coordinated Entry System
Homeless Management Information System
of
of a CoC
ANALYSIS: The
Reports to MUD
iContinuum
Care (CoCj
DISCUSSION:
Identify info. to
gather about
OR-502
Local CoC
Project Monitoring
Local FundingCompetition
AnConsolidated Plan
Informing Local Jurisdictions
Services
Homeless services Matrix
4 people
assign SO/SSO
Jr or
PRESENTATIO
ANALYSIS_
s people
assign ES/TH
Inventory
�eroze ir,ertcra
N: Services
SWOT of
3 people
assign PH
progress
Inventory
Services
Other (nor—homelessServices Matrix
Staff
Inventory
Barriers to Accessing Services
All
DISCUSSION:
Barriers to
Accessing
Services
Data about
HMISData
Jan
update or Bata
PRESENTATIO
ANALYSIS -
school McKinney-Vemo Data
Staff
People and
collection
N: Data
Data
Jackson Co. Housing Authority
staff
Programs
progress
First Responders
Echo
Emergency Departments
Echo
Affordable Housing Inventory
staff
Outline for
Government Funding - Sources, purpose, and
TBA
PRESENTATION
Money Map
most current allocation
: Draft Money
Major Program Budgets - Annual budget by
TBA
Map
source fRovernment. foundations community,
Community
See list of various populations
TBA
Decide on
Review plans
Update cr
Review public
PRESENTATIO
Perspectives
populations and
on how to
community input
input
N &
who will work
reach each
progress
highlights, and
DISCUSSION:
on how to reach
population.
decide who
Community
each population
Decide on
will prepare
input /
ions.
I
the findin s
findin s
Communicatio
Plan communications with the Health & Human
All
Decide content
2/29 -
3/5 -
Decide cc-tert
3/28 -
4/1 -
Review draft
Review final
Share
Share
ns with HHSAC
Services Advisory Commission and GtyCouncil
and format for
Provide
Provide
and format for
Share
Study
report. Suggest
report and
final
final
and City
reporting to
HHSAC
Council
reporting to
plans for
Session or
revisions.
plans for
report
report
Council
HHSAC and Gry
w/ HMPS
w/ HMPS
HHSAC and City
communit
4/2 -
Discuss format
sharing with
with
with City
Council
Approach
Approach
Council
y
Shane
for reporting
HHSAC and
HHSAC
Council
Tasks
, Tasks
outreach
plans for
to HHSAC and
City Council
&
&
with
communit
City Council
Timeline
timeline
HHSAC
y
Community Development Department
20 East Main Street Tel: 541.488.5300
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax 541.5522059
ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900
SPEAKER REQUEST FORM
,� Submit this form to the meeting Secretary
aet
c�� prior to the discussion item.
])You will be called forward when it is your turn to speak
2) State your name and speak clearly into the microphone
3) Limit your comments to the time allotted
4) Provide any written materials to the meeting Secretary
5) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their statement
Date: � 112—q—
Ncme Please Print)
Ashland Resident:
YES ❑ NO City:
Agenda Topic/Item Number:
Public Forum Topic (Non -agenda Item):
h �xo V-\
Please respect the order of proceedings and strictly follow the
directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are loud
or disruptive are disrespectful and offenders will be requested to
leave.
Disclaimer: By submitting this request to address the Public Body, I
agree that I will refrain from the use of any obscene, vulgar, or
profane language. I understand that if I do not follow procedure my
speaking time may be terminated, and I may be requested to sit down
or leave the building.
SPEAKER REQUEST FORM
e
Submit this form to the City Recorder prior to
the discussion item.
1) You will be called forward when it is your turn to speak
2) State your name and speak clearly into the microphone
3) Limit your comments to the time allotted
4) Provide any written materials to the City Recorder
5) speakers are solely responsible for the content of their statement
Date:
Name: (Please Print)
Ashland Resident:
YES [:]NO City:
Agenda Topic/Item Number:
40W Lej
Public Forum Topic (Non -agenda Item):
Please respect the order of proceedings and strictly follow the
directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are loud
or disruptive are disrespectful and offenders will be requested to
leave.
Disclaimer: By submitting this request to address the City Council, I
agree that I will refrain from the use of any obscene, vulgar, or
profane language. I understand that if I do not follow procedure my
speaking time may be terminated, and I may be requested to sit down
or leave the building.
SPEAKER REQUEST FORM
Submit this form to the City Recorder prior to
the discussion item.
1) You will be called forward when it is your turn to speak
2) state your name and speak clearly into the microphone
3) Limit your comments to the time allotted
4) Provide any written materials to the City Recorder
5) speakers solely responsible for the content of their statement
Date: r
1
Nam lea a Print)
f4
Ashland Resident
0 YES ❑ NO City:
Age da/ Topic/Item Numb /
&(
Public Forum Topic (N n-agenda Item):
Please respect the order of proceedings and strictly follow the
directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are loud
or disruptive are disrespectful and offenders will be requested to leave.
Disclaimer: By submitting this request to address the City Council, I
agree that I will refrain from the use of any obscene, vulgar, or
profane language. I understand that if I do not follow procedure my
speaking time may be terminated, and I may be requested to sit down
or leave the building.
SPEAKER REQUEST FORM
Submit this form to the City Recorder prior to
the discussion item.
1) You will be called forward when it is your turn to speak
2) State your name and speak clearly into the microphone
3) Limit your comments to the time allotted
4) Provide any written materials to the City Recorder
5) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their statement
Date:
Name: (Please Print)
0( 4-, - VN__ L '�:a k ) U ')
Ashland Resident:
YES ONO City:
Agenda Topic/Item Number:
'N I C� � i ( :� C9 -&'� � IL.� . T_��
Public Forum Topic (Non -agenda Item):
Please respect the order of proceedings and strictly follow the
directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are loud
or disruptive are disrespectful and offenders will be requested to
leave.
Disclaimer: By submitting this request to address the City Council, I
agree that I will refrain from the use of any obscene, vulgar, or
profane language. I understand that if I do not follow procedure my
speaking time may be terminated, and I may be requested to sit down
or leave the building.
W SPEAKER REQUEST FORM
Submit this form to the City Recorder prior to
�,����,✓ the discussion item.
1) You will be called forward when it is your turn to speak
2) State your name and speak clearly into the microphone
3) Limit your comments to the time allotted
4) Provide any written materials to the City Recorder
5) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their statement
Date: /I
Name: (Please Print)
K0M - 4.'t�
Ashla d Resident:
r7YES ❑ NO City:
Agenda Topic/Item Number:
H 16Shc5-
Public Forum Topic (Non -agenda Item):
Please respect the order of proceedings and strictly follow the
directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are loud
or disruptive are disrespectful and offenders will be requested to leave.
Disclaimer: By submitting this request to address the City Council, I
agree that I will refrain from the use of any obscene, vulgar, or
profane language. I understand that if I do not follow procedure my
speaking time may be terminated, and I may be requested to sit down
or leave the building.