Compare governments

How much of each government's agenda goes to a subject, next to the regional average. Counting alone would rank these places by size — Cary puts ten times as many items on its agendas as Pittsboro — so everything here is a share or a rate, and the count it rests on is always beside it.

Of the agenda items we have been able to classify for this government, what fraction carry the subject. Not of every item — whether an item is classifiable at all depends on the agenda platform, not on the government.

governments with any

381

agenda items counted

15.6%

regional average

Every subject, past 12 months

Ranked by share of classified work. The bar shows the value; the line across it is the regional average, where one applies. "Agenda read" is how much of that government's agenda carries any subject at all — a share computed over a tenth of an agenda describes a tenth of an agenda.
Government	Subject	Share of classified work	Items	Of classified	Agenda read	Range	Against the region
Town of Hillsborough	Budget and appropriations	21.7%	64	283	57%	18–28%	more than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Parks and recreation	15.2%	45	283	57%	12–21%	more than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Historic preservation	11.8%	37	283	57%	10–18%	more than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Environment and sustainability	11.4%	35	283	57%	9–17%	more than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Appointments and personnel	9.9%	27	283	57%	7–14%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Grants and outside funding	7.8%	23	283	57%	5–12%	more than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Water and sewer	4.5%	13	283	57%	3–8%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Rezoning	4.4%	11	283	57%	2–7%	less than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Housing and affordability	4.3%	12	283	57%	2–7%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Intergovernmental agreements	3.8%	11	283	57%	2–7%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Public facilities	3.8%	10	283	57%	2–6%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Zoning text amendment	3.5%	10	283	57%	2–6%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Police and public safety	2.6%	6	283	57%	1–5%	less than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Data centers and large loads	2.6%	8	283	57%	1–5%	more than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Contracts and procurement	2.4%	5	283	57%	1–4%	less than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Roads and transportation	2.3%	5	283	57%	1–4%	less than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Annexation	2.2%	5	283	57%	1–4%	less than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Land conversion and large development	2.2%	6	283	57%	1–5%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Schools and education	2.1%	6	283	57%	1–5%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Health and human services	1.9%	4	283	57%	1–4%	less than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Stormwater and flooding	1.9%	5	283	57%	1–4%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Broadband and technology	1.6%	5	283	57%	1–4%	more than the region
Town of Hillsborough	Faith and cultural communities	1.5%	4	283	57%	1–4%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Elections and districts	1.5%	4	283	57%	1–4%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Litigation and settlements	1.4%	4	283	57%	1–4%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Subdivision and site plans	1.3%	3	283	57%	0–3%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Tax rate and revaluation	1.2%	3	283	57%	0–3%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Comprehensive plan	1.2%	3	283	57%	0–3%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Bonds and debt	0.9%	2	283	57%	0–3%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Civil rights and nondiscrimination	0.7%	2	283	57%	0–3%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Fees and utility rates	0.5%	1	283	57%	0–2%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	State legislative agenda	0.4%	1	283	57%	0–2%	within the usual range
Town of Hillsborough	Equity and inclusion	0.4%	1	283	57%	0–2%	within the usual range

Download this table as CSV Two governments side by side What has been changing

How to read this

Share is the fraction of a government's classified agenda items carrying the subject — not of every item. That distinction matters more than it sounds. Where a portal publishes a structured item list, that list is the whole agenda, call to order and adjournment included; where it does not, the item list is written out by the summarization worker, which records the substantive business and skips the ceremony. On this site 40% of Cary's items carry a subject against 79% of Apex's, and the difference is the agenda platform, not the town. Dividing by every item made portal governments look half as engaged in everything.

The share is adjusted toward the regional average in proportion to how little evidence stands behind it — a board with four classified items and one rezoning does not get reported as the most development-focused place in the region. The range beside it is a 95% interval on the unadjusted figure.

Against the region says whether that interval clears the regional average. Agenda items are not a random sample of anything, so this is a guard against reading noise as a finding rather than a statistical test. A government with few items will almost always read as within the usual range, because with few items almost nothing can be told apart.

Per 10,000 voters is judged against a per-resident regional rate, not against the share — a small town with a busy agenda can be first per resident and unremarkable as a share, and both are true. The interval there is on the item count rather than a percentage, because once the denominator is a population the items are arrivals and not a proportion. It uses registered voters from the State Board of Elections, summed across counties for a town that straddles a line. Registered voters are not population: they leave out children, non-citizens, and adults who have not registered, and the share who register differs from place to place. It is the denominator this state publishes per municipality and keeps current, which no population estimate does.