United Way: Randolph County households are struggling to keep up economically

ASHEBORO — The United Way of Randolph County found that nearly half of local households were not earning enough to pay for the basic essentials each month.

This came up during an annual report by Executive Director Samantha Baker at the Nov. 3 Board of Commissioners meeting.

Baker said they used the “ALICE threshold” when studying point-in-time data from 2022, tracking trends in financial hardship. ALICE stands for “asset limited, income constrained, employed.” The Threshold places people earning above the federal poverty level but less than their county’s basic cost of living.

In Randolph County, 28,499 of households, or 49 percent, fell below the ALICE Threshold in 2022.

“That’s the reality of our landscape of Randolph County,” Baker told commissioners. She said many of these families earn too much to qualify for traditional assistance programs.

The municipality with the highest percentage below the Threshold was the Town of Ramseur at 73 percent, or 633 households. The lowest, Coleridge Township, was 26 percent.

ALICE Threshold numbers

Baker said that the United Way of North Carolina breaks down the essentials for various budget scenarios, including single adults, senior citizens, and families. The essentials make up the minimum cost to live and work in Randolph County.

A single adult, Baker said, would need to make at least $29,328 annually to afford the essentials, and a family of four would need to earn at least $76,572.

Those essentials include housing, food, transportation, health care, child care and technology. Baker told Randolph Hub that examples of essential technology are cell phone plans and connection to broadband Internet.

Baker said it takes into account federal payroll taxes — Social Security and Medicare — and federal, state and local income tax withholdings. It also considers the child tax credit and the child and dependent care tax credit.

“When wages and living costs do not meet, families slide into crisis, even while working fulltime jobs,” Baker said.

According to the report, the median household income in Randolph County is $55,671, compared to the North Carolina average of $67,481.

Baker told Randolph Hub that the next update with 2023 numbers is expected in May 2026. More information can be found at UnitedForALICE.org.

People looking for local assistance programs can call 211, a non-emergency resource line. 

Baker said the most common request they’ve gotten was help with paying electric bills, followed by rent.

Status of federal benefits

At the end of the meeting, Commissioner Chair Darrell Frye invited the Departments of Social Services (DSS) and Public Health to give updates on their food assistance programs, asking how they were affected by the pause in SNAP benefits during the federal government shutdown.

DSS Director Tracie Murphy said they were told to only expect about 50 percent of the regular SNAP funds per family, and those would be delayed. 

She said that with approximately 22,000 people receiving SNAP benefits, Randolph County has one of the highest percentages of the program’s beneficiaries in the state. A federal judge out of Rhode Island had ordered at least $4 billion in contingency funds to go to SNAP recipients. 

On Wednesday, Nov. 5, the Administration announced it had $4.65 billion available. With approximately 42 million recipients nationwide, that averages to about $110 per person.

Akers, director of public health, said the WIC program is not currently affected, and people who get WIC benefits can still expect them at least through the month of November. 

However, she said they are closely monitoring the situation.

Speakers talk about book banning

Commissioners have announced a meeting on Dec. 8 to discuss he future of the Randolph County Library Board after it voted last month to keep in place a book in the children’s section about transgenderism. A public notice ran in Randolph Hub on Nov. 5 The 6 p.m. meeting will be at the Historic Randolph County Courthouse Meeting Room, 145-C Worth St. Asheboro.

 All the speakers in Monday’s meeting were about the library board. Commissioner Chairman Darrell Frye told them he would stick to the 15-minute limit, 3-minutes-to-talk public comment period at the beginning, but then those who didn’t speak could wait and do so at meeting’s end. A lot of the people who signed up left before the meeting was over, but a couple remained.

Here are some of the responses:

Carl Hicks — “I’m concerned that removing ‘Call Me Max’ sets a troubling precedent. Today, it’s one book. Tomorrow, it could be many. Each removal narrows the diversity of voices our library should reflect. Though I disagree with the book’s content, I believe in engaging with ideas rather than hiding from them.”

Jonathan Burris — “When last we met, we were calling on you and to bring it to your attention about the upcoming hearing over a book that specifically targets 5- to 7-year-olds to introduce them to transgenderism. … It exposed a major problem in our county gov-ernment. Sensitive matters such as this are handled by an unelected group of bureaucrats who seemingly answer to no one.”

Rebecca Todd — “There are people whose children are born, and they feel different, and they need help. They need a chance to reach out and they need information. And our library is there to help people. To help people find their way, to help people educate themselves.”

Jennifer Rock — “All we were asking were these books to be relocated so that this is not something that — more than once has happened to us — [my children] just pulled [a book] off the shelf. My children are a little bit older now, but when they were 5, they could grab a book. I don’t want to have to explain that to a 5-year-old.”

Krys Gollihue — “What I think is really special about our library system right now is that we’re undergoing this really interesting process of strategic planning. You all have a library board that is open to public comment that is coming to each of the library branches and getting real input from community members. … If we do away with certain board members, if we do away with the board, we do run the risk of upsetting and disrupting that process that really requires a lot of stability.”