HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 09-04-2025; 8-a - Minutes for the July 8, 2025 Business Meeting 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: September 4, 2025
Action Agenda
Item No. 8-a
SUBJECT: Minutes for July 8, 2025 Business Meeting
DEPARTMENT: Board of County
Commissioners
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Draft Minutes (under separate cover) Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board, 919-
245-2130
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the draft minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board
as listed below.
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board
has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's
proceedings.
Attachment 1: July 8, 2025 Business Meeting
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports:
• GUIDING PRINCIPLE — COMMUNICATION AND AWARENESS
We provide information and opportunities for engagement in a transparent manner so that
all in our community have knowledge, understanding, and a voice.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
Attachment 1
1
1 DRAFT MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY
3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
4 BUSINESS MEETING
5 July 8, 2025
6 7:00 p.m.
7
8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Tuesday, July 8,
9 2025, at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC.
10
11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Jean Hamilton
12 and Commissioners Marilyn Carter, Amy Fowler, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-
13 Ascott
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None.
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
17 Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present.
21
22 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
23
24 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to
25 remove item 6-a from the agenda.
26
27 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
28
29 Chair Bedford read the public charge.
30
31 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
32 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
33 There was no one signed up to speak.
34
35 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
36 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.)
37
38 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
39 Chair Bedford thanked the county's emergency management team for their response to
40 Tropical Storm Chantal. She described some of the different ways the county and municipalities
41 worked together during the storm as well as recovery.
42 Commissioner Portie-Ascott expressed thanks to emergency management for their
43 efforts. She said she attended two Juneteenth events, one at Mount Zion featuring the
44 Tuskegee Airmen with flight simulation activities, and another at Jones Grove Baptist Church
45 where the Sheriff's department and state highway patrol participated. and the Perry Hills mini-
46 park opening. She said she attended the NCACC briefing on Medicaid and SNAP benefit cuts.
47 Commissioner Greene said she attended Juneteenth celebration at Mount Zion and the
48 Festival for the Eno on July 4th. She thanked the Emergency Services Director, Kirby Saunders,
49 and his team for their work during Tropical Storm Chantal. She expressed her sympathy to the
50 families impacted by the storm. She said that this storm and the recent floods in Texas show
51 the need for investment in emergency services.
2
1 Vice-Chair Hamilton said thanked first responders for their response during Tropical
2 Storm Chantal and expressed sympathy to those impacted by the storm. She said that there
3 are many community members helping each other to recover. She said regarding the
4 revaluation, she is looking forward to the consultant's analysis of the county's process. She said
5 that revaluation is complicated, but she is dedicated to fully understanding how the process
6 works.
7 Commissioner Fowler echoed thanks to the emergency management teams. She said
8 she attended the Strategic Communications Work Group during which they heard the
9 procedures followed in response to a public information request. She said that the group is a
10 public body, and meetings of the group are open. She said at their most recent meeting they
11 held a public comment period with one participant. She said that the new Director of
12 Community Relations and the County Manager have initiated a strategic communications plan
13 to enhance access to county government. She said they are considering if the work group is still
14 necessary given the recent changes, or if there should be regular reports to the Board on
15 strategic communications and public survey information. She proposed that the Board consider
16 this for future discussion. She said she attended the Chamber economic development update
17 for local elected leaders. She said that July is Disability Pride Month, which commemorates the
18 signing of the Americans with Disability Act. She raised concerns over proposed Medicaid cuts
19 and other challenges threatening essential care and independence for one in four U.S. adults
20 identifying as having a disability. She discussed the impact of federal special education cuts, a
21 nationwide staffing crisis, and social security issues that limit benefit access. She said the
22 theme for Disability Pride Month is "We Belong Here and We're Here to Stay," highlighting the
23 community's resilience despite threats to disability rights and services.
24 Commissioner Carter thanked residents for attending and joined colleagues in
25 expressing gratitude to emergency management professionals. She mentioned attending
26 Juneteenth events and witnessing flood damage in Chapel Hill, particularly at the Eastgate
27 Shopping Center. She expressed concern about the impact of the recently passed federal
28 legislation affecting Medicaid and SNAP administration, noting she would be attending a
29 conference to learn more about how other counties are addressing these impacts.
30 Commissioner McKee described some of the effects of Tropical Storm Chantal in the
31 county. He said that first responders were out in the storm helping people through the night. He
32 said that people contacted him about various issues they experienced during the storm,
33 including an elderly resident with a leak in their home. He said he attended the Caldwell July 4t"
34 parade and that he heard a recitation of Red Skelton's commentary on the Pledge of Allegiance
35 and encouraged others to look it up.
36
37 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
38 a. Presentation by Orange County 4-H's Youth Delegate to the 2025 North Carolina
39 Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) YouthVoice Conference
40 The Board received remarks from Orange County 4-H youth member Navya Sharma on her 4-H
41 youth development experience and learning objectives in preparation for the 2025 North
42 Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) YouthVoice Conference.
43
44 BACKGROUND: The 2025 North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC)
45 YouthVoice Conference will be held August 22-23, 2025 in Pitt County, North Carolina. Orange
46 County 4-H has selected Navya Sharma to attend as the YouthVoice Delegate from Orange
47 County. Navya is a rising 9th grade student at East Chapel Hill High School, and has been an
48 active member of Orange County 4-H, participating on the 2024 KidsVoting Orange County
49 planning team, attending youth leadership conferences and teen retreats, and serving as a
50 County Council officer. Navya has competed in the North Carolina GIS Competition and is the
3
1 K-12 student representative on the newly formed Orange County Food Security Program
2 Advisory Council.
3 As a prerequsite to attending the annual NCACC YouthVoice Conference, county youth
4 delegates like Navya are required to speak at a Board of County Commissioners meeting and
5 submit a photo of themselves with their Board of Commissioners prior to attending the
6 conference.
7
8 According to the NCACC, YouthVoice provides county commissioners with the opportunity to
9 connect with the next generation of leaders. The event brings together Youth Delegates from 4-
10 H Youth Development and Boys and Girls Clubs of North Carolina. YouthVoice, which takes
11 place on Friday and Saturday of the NCACC's Annual Conference, offers sessions that help
12 youth gain a better understanding of what county governments do and the role of
13 commissioners as the governing body for counties, and provides multiple opportunities for youth
14 and county officials to connect. Youth and county officials are formally together for Saturday's
15 lunch and plenary session. County officials are also invited to participate in other educational
16 components of YouthVoice.
17
18 Navya Sharma described the ways 4-H impacted her life and thanked the
19 commissioners for their support of 4-H.
20 The commissioners asked Navya Sharma some questions about her 4-H activities, and
21 Commissioner Portie-Ascott invited her to sit with her at the NCACC Annual Conference in
22 August. Commissioners McKee and Fowler shared some of their 4-H activities. The Board
23 then took a picture with Navya Sharma.
24 Chair Bedford encouraged anyone with children to learn more about 4-H programs in
25 Orange County.
26
27 5. Public Hearings
28 None.
29
30 6. Regular Agenda
31 a. Approval of Eno-Haw Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan
32 This item was removed at the beginning of the meeting and will be considered at a later date.
33
34 b. Resolution in Opposition to Senate Bill 205
35 The Board approved a resolution opposing Senate Bill 205.
36
37 BACKGROUND: At the Board's Business meeting on June 17, 2025, Commissioner Phyllis
38 Portie-Ascott noted recent discussions and concerns related to Senate Bill 205 currently under
39 consideration in the North Carolina General Assembly. Introduced during the current General
40 Assembly session, Senate Bill 205 has been amended in a manner that changes many aspects
41 of local planning and zoning authority and dramatically impacts the ability of local governments
42 to act in ways that reflect the will of their communities by amending Chapter 160D of the North
43 Carolina General Statutes.
44
45 Rather than defer to local government staff and elected officials, the bill often prescribes
46 planning standards and processes that limit public involvement and professional expertise in
47 land use change matters. The bill, as drafted, is contrary in its intentions to the Orange County
48 Strategic Plan's Vision Statement: "We are a diverse, inclusive, and healthy county working
49 together to strengthen our community and enhance the quality of life for all residents."
50
4
1 Chapter 160D provides comprehensive planning and zoning authority to local governments and
2 would be significantly eroded by the passage of Senate Bill 205, which would diminish the input
3 and will of local communities.
4
5 It was requested at the June 17th meeting that staff present a resolution for Board consideration
6 at this July 8, 2025 meeting opposing Senate Bill 205.
7
8 John Roberts said that Senate Bill 205 would make substantial changes to land use law
9 in North Carolina, effectively stripping local governments of significant authority. He said the bill
10 was opposed by the Board, as well as other local governments across the state. He said the bill
11 would have a substantial impact on local land use planning.
12 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she brought it to the Board on the recommendation
13 from the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners. She said that the bill takes
14 power from local government and silences community voices.
15 Cy Stober, Planning Director, expressed appreciation to the County Attorney's Office for
16 detailing the impacts of the law for the county and his department. He said this bill would
17 fundamentally change how applications are received and administered in Orange County, and
18 would limit public participation and notification of land use changes.
19 Commissioner McKee said he was recently invited to meet with senators crafting
20 legislation for local regulations. He said that was only the second time in 15 years that he had
21 been invited to provide input into a piece of legislation at the General Assembly. He said that
22 bills are often drafted in-house and can be developed and approved very quickly if there are the
23 votes. He said that this bill will have a lot of effects on how Orange County does Planning.
24
25 A motion was made by Commissioner Portie-Ascott, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton,
26 to approve the resolution and authorize the Chair to sign.
27
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 7. Reports
31 a. Report on 2025 Revaluation Review Efforts
32 The Board:
33 1) Received descriptions of the types of analyses that are being performed on the 2025
34 revaluation results based on different property characteristics and provide acceptable
35 margins; and
36 2) Received information outlining the actions that will be taken by the Tax Office for
37 properties outside of the acceptable margins.
38
39 BACKGROUND: On June 1, 2025, the Tax Office requested that vendor Spatialest provide a
40 study to compare valuation data from 2024 to 2025 to determine whether specific property or
41 building types experienced greater percentage growth, and if so, identify the corresponding
42 growth rates. Additionally, the vendor will conduct a vertical equity analysis to assess whether
43 lower-value homes are being overvalued and higher-value homes undervalued.
44
45 The analyses includes three projects:
46 • Residential
47 • Non-Residential
48 • 2024 vs 2025 Value
49
50 The purpose of the Residential and Non-Residential analyses is to review the vertical equity in
51 the 2025 Revaluation to ensure that assessment levels are consistent over the range of values,
5
1 with high-value and low-value properties exhibiting similar ratio of assessment to market value.
2 The vendor is calculating the Mean and Median Sales Ratios, the Price-Related Differential
3 (PRD) and the Coefficient of Dispersion (COD) based on building type and land use, as well as
4 vacant and improved, and building age.
5 The 2024 vs 2025 Value project identifies the amount of increase or decrease in value of
6 properties from the previous 2024 values to the 2025 Revaluation values. The project looks at
7 the range by taxing district, such as the Carrboro or Hillsborough taxing district. It also
8 compares land value changes, building value changes, and overall total value changes.
9
10 The vendor will provide the data in full in Portable Document Format (PDF), and will also
11 provide individual spreadsheets in Microsoft Excel format so the data itself can be reviewed.
12 Descriptions and examples of each type of study are included in the attached presentation.
13
14 Analyses are expected to be completed by July 9, 2025. Staff will review the vendor's results
15 immediately upon receipt, with the goal of completing the review before the Board of
16 Equalization and Review adjourns on July 31, 2025. This timeline ensures any necessary value
17 adjustments based on the review can be presented to the Board of Equalization and Review for
18 approval consideration. The finalized analysis results and corresponding changes are proposed
19 for presentation to the Board of Commissioners at its September 16, 2025 Business meeting.
20
21 Nancy Freeman, Tax Administrator, made the following presentation:
22
23 Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
1*40RTH C:,A.RC)OLINA
2025 Revaluation
Review Efforts
Nancy Freeman
Orange County Tax Administrator
July 8.2025
24
25
26
6
1 Slide #2
2025 Revaluation Review Purpose
• Provide descriptions of the types of analyses that are being performed on the
2025 revaluation results based on different property characteristics and
provide acceptable margins; and
• Outline the actions that will be taken by the Tax Office for properties outside
of the acceptable margins.
ORANGE COUNTY
2 NOR 1'H C:ARC71..1 NA
2
3
4 Slide #3
Description of Study
On June 1, 2025 the Tax Office requested that a third party
vendor provide a study to compare valuation data from
2024 to 2025 to determine whether specific property or
building types experienced greater percentage growth, and
if so, identify the corresponding growth rates.
Additionally, the Tax Office requested that the vendor
provide a vertical equity analysis to assess whether lower-
value homes are being overvalued and higher-value homes
undervalued.
ORANGE COUNTY
3 NORTH CAROLINA,
5
6
7
7
1 Slide #4
What is included
The analyses includes three projects:
• Residential Vertical Equity Analysis
• Non-Residential Vertical Equity Analysis
• 2024 vs 2025 Value Study by Building or
Property Types
ORANGE COUNTY
4 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #5
Vertical Equity
Vertical Equity Analysis of Residential and Non-Residential
analyses will review vertical equity in the 2025 Revaluation to
ensure that assessment levels are consistent over the range of
values, with high-value and low-value properties exhibiting
similar ratio of assessment to market value.
The vendor is calculating the Mean and Median Sales Ratios,
the Coefficient of Dispersion (COD) and the Price-Related
Differential (PRD) based on building type and land use, as well
as vacant and improved, and building age.
Analyses conducted using sales as they are and also using
time adjusted sale prices..
ORANGE COUNTY
S NC)RTH CARC)LINA
5
6
7 Nancy Freeman said time adjusted sale prices is the process for modifying sales prices
8 to reflect changes in market conditions between the sales date and the appraisal date.
9
10
8
1 Slide #6
Vertical Equity (continued)
Data reviewed by:
• Tax Rate code
• Census block data
Township
• Quintile
- Evenly divides properties by value into 5 groups of roughly 7,200
properties
- Allows analysis on like-valued properties
Outliers identified when separating properties are excluded and
reviewed separately.
Exempt properties have been removed from the analyses.
ORANC;E COUNTY
6 1 CAROLINA
2
3
4
5 Slide #7
2024 Vs 2025 Value Study
The 2024 vs 2025 Value project identifies the amount
of increase or decrease in value of properties from
the previous 2024 values to the 2025 Revaluation
values.
The project looks at the range by tax district, such as
Carrboro or Hillsborough tax district. It compares land
value changes by tax district and building value
changes by tax district. It also includes overall total
value changes.
7 O a NGE�C COAROLIUNTY
6
7
8
9
9
1 Slide #8
Performance Standards
How do we know what is correct and what needs review?
Price-Related Differential (PRD) is used to identify categories outside of
accepted standards when reviewing vertical equity.
PRD is a statistical measure used to assess the equity of property
appraisals, specifically examining whether higher-value properties are
assessed at the same ratio to market value as lower-value properties. It
helps determine if the appraisal process is biased towards or against
certain property values.
PRD does not identify an issue, but points to the possibility of an issue.
ORANGE COUNTY
8 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #9
Performance Measures (continued)
• Median Sales Ratio and Coefficient of Dispersion (COD) are used when
calculating PRD.
• NC Department of Revenue provides the standard for Median Sales Ratio
Standard for Median Sales Ratio: 90% - 110%
• International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) provides generally
accepted performace standards for COD and PRD
Standard Ranges for COD: 5.0—25.0
�- Standard for PRD: 4.98— 1.03
s
ORANGE COUNTY
AROLINA5
6
7
10
1 Slide #10
Performance Standards — Sales Ratio
Sales Ratio = Assessed Value 1 Sales Price
• It is the ratio of a property's assessed value to its actual sale price
■ Ratio of 1.00 (or 100%) indicates the assessed value is equal to the sale price.
■ Ratio above 1.00 means the assessed value is higher than sale price.
• Ratio below 1.00 means the assessed value is lower than dale price.
The median sales ratio represents the typical relationship between
assessed values and the corresponding sales prices in an area
such as countywide or in a neighborhood.
0RAN(JE COUNTY
10 1 CAROLINA2
3
4 Slide #11
Performance Standards — Sales Ratio
- Median Sales Ratio is found by ordering all ratios from
highest to lowest and selecting the middle value, which
reduces the impact of outliers.
* The mean sales ratio is the average of the dataset of sales
ratios.
- Median sales ratio is more widely used than the mean sales
ratio and the standard provided by NCDQR.
„ CRAW HE COUNTY
LINA5
6
7
11
1 Slide #12
Sales Ratio — Within Standards
Sales Ratio Chart—Assessment Ratios by Sale Price
--- Ideal A%Sessmenl Raga-1.04 x
1.15
X x
1.30 x z
X x x xx
X
X x
x x x
ck 1.05 x x x
x
ai x x x x x
min x x x x x
y F M
1.06 ---------------------- -----------------------------x
yN X x % xx xx x
eT q
x
0..9'5 x x x x x x %
x x
x
0.90 x
0.85
X
$100.000 $250.000 $400.000 5550.000 5700,000 $850,000 51.006.000
Sale Price
12
ORANGE A COUNTY
OTANA2
3 Nancy Freeman said slide #12 was an example. She said that the chart showed the
4 majority of the sales are at the same level.
5
6 Slide #13
Performance Measures — Coefficient of Dispersion
Coefficient of Dispersion is used to measure uniformity in a sales
ratio study. A high COD indicates a large variance between the
highest ratios and the lowest ratios compared to the median. A low
COD represents conformity amongst the county.
COD standards vary by strata, which is the division of properties into
distinct groups or categories for mass appraisal purposes.
• Single-family homes and condominiums (urban and suburban)
Newer or homogenous market areas: 5.0 to 1 0.0
• Older or heterogenous market areas: 5.0 to 15.0
GRANGE COUNTY
1.3 NORTH CAROLINA
7
8
9
12
1 Slide #14
Performance Measures — Price-Related Differential
(PRD)
PRD = Mean Ratio divided by Weighted Mean Ratio
•.• Mean Ratio = sum of appraised values divided by number of appraised
values
❖ Weighted Mean Ratio = sum of appraised values less sum of sales prices
IAA0 Standard Acceptable range: 0.98- 1 .03
Results of PRD:
r A PRD above 1.03: appraisal process may be regressive, meaning higher-
valued properties are undervalued compared to lower-valued properties,
A PRD below 0.98 appraisal process may be progressive, indicating that
higher-valued properties are assessed at a higher rate than lower-valued
properties.
,a ORAINGE CTH OUNATY
2
3
4 Slide #15
Price-Related Differential (PRD) - Equitable
PRD = 1.000 — Equitable Pattern (Within Standard)
x --- Ideal Rado v 1.00
1.190
1.075 x
1.050 x
o x
x
1.025 x x
x
uci x x x
N1.000 -------------------------------M-x------x---- x----------------
44 x x x x
0.975
x x x x
x x
0.950 -
0.925
.950 0.925
$100.000 $250.000 $400.,000 $550,000 $700',000 5850:000 51.004,000
Sale Prig
ORANGE COUNTY
15 NC)rt°r'I1 CAROLINA
5
6
7
13
1 Slide #16
Price-Related Differential (PRD) — Regressive
PRD -a 1.055 — Regressive Pattern (Outside Standard)
1.4
y� --- Weal Rano 1.n 0•
xx
1.3 .x
x
x M
x x xx
t 1.2 x x x
x x
x
1.1 xxxxx
x
� R x x x x
x
M x
1.0 _ ___-_-_ _--- __-_-_-_x-T{- Y.._.A._e_or_r-----_-_.
x x R
x x
x xxx
0.4
$100,000 $250,000 $400,000 $550,000 $706,000 $650,040 $1,060,000
Sale Price
16 ORAS G COUNTY
2
3
4 Slide #17
Price-Related Differential (PRD) - Progressive
PRD Chart—Progressive Assessment Pattern
PRD=0.947 (Outside Standards)
1.3
--- Ideal Reteo=1.00
1.2
0C
ivy 1.1 x „
m X. x v
w y x x XX xx
1.0--------------------'x---------------
x-----------x---------------------------------
X
x X X x
X
x
.... x
x
0.9xs x x xx
0.8
$100,000 $250,000 $400,000 ;550,060 5760,000 $850,000 51,000,000
Sale Price
ORANGE COUNTY
17 Nt7RTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
14
1 Slide #18
Action: What the Tax Office Will Do
Tax Administration will follow the standards for PRD as set by the IAAO to
identify categories outside of the accepted standards. PRD is an indicator of
the presence of possible issues, a signal to do further review. It does not
always identify that there is an issue, or what issue needs to be addressed.
Once the review has been completed based on PRD for the different
categories, Tax Office will look at the neighborhoods that make up
categories outside the standard range. The analysis at the neighborhood
level will indicate if there is an issue that needs to be addressed or if the
PRD is off due to explainable reasons: new construction or a missed
exemption for example.
ORAN(jE COUNTY
1s I CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #19
Action: What the Tax Office Will Do (continued)
If on review, an issue is determined, the Tax Office will identify
the properties affected by the issue and define value changes
needed. Then present the findings to the Board of Equalization
and Review (BOER) and request a motion to make the
appropriate changes to the property record. If the BOER agrees
and makes a motion doing so, the values will be updated
accordingly, and new value notices will be mailed to those
property owners that are affected.
19
ORANGE COUNTY
AROLINA5
6
7
15
1 Slide #20
Current Work — Request to BOER
The process of requesting that the Board of Equalization and Review (BOER)
direct the Tax Office to make changes to values has been conducted for one
neighborhood during 2025 BOER. The request was based on an analysis of
neighborhood 5306, Chestnut Oaks, and was presented at the June 12, 2025
meeting.
• During property review for an appeal, the appraiser found data errors in calculations
for a property used in creating the model for valuing the neighborhood.
• Correcting error and updating the neighborhood analysis revealed that other
properties in the neighborhood should be adjusted.
ORANGE COUNTY
20 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #21
Current Work — Request to BOER (continued)
• Tax Office requested BOER to give direction to adjust dawn the values for the
affected properties.
• A motion was made by a Board member and was approved.
• Value change will be reflected in decision notices sent for the properties who
appealed their values.
Property owners in the neighborhood who dict not appeal their value will be
sent a value change notice.
Changes made to property values based on board motions are recorded in
the minutes for June 12, 2025.
ORANGE COUNTY
21 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
16
1 Slide #22
Current Work — Neighborhood Reviews
In addition to the study that the Tax Office has contracted out, there are
reviews being conducted internally to review vertical regressivity. These
reviews are being conducted based on the office's internal review of
neighborhoods.
Of the 1 ,000 neighborhoods in Orange County, we have identified 44 by
internal review and are including 20 that have been suggested by
OCPTJC.
ORANGE COUNTY
22 NORTH CAROLINA
Z
3
4 Slide #23
Current Werk — Neighborhood Reviews (continued)
Steps Taken:
1. PRD has been calculated for each of the neighborhoods.
2_ For any that fall out of the standard range, the Prlce-Related Bias (PRB) is
calculated.
After discussion with UNC School of Government Representative, Price-Related Bias (PRB)
is being used as a second review based on their recommendation. PRB is a statistical
measure of vertical equity in property assessments. It quantifies how assessment ratios
(assessed value to sale price) change with the value of the property. In practical terms, PRB
represents the percentage change in the assessment ratio when property value is doubled
or halved.As a general rule,the PRB coefficient should fall between-0.05 and 0.05.
3. Graphs are generated for each of the neighborhoods. For neighborhoods that are
outside of PRB standards the graphs will help to identify any outllers that need to
be reviewed.
23
ORANGE ACO NATY
5
6
7
8
17
1 Slide #24
Current Work — Neighborhood Reviews (continued)
4. The outlier will be excluded, the reason noted, and the PRD/ PRB analysis
recalculated.
5. If removing the outlier does not move the neighborhood within standards, land
value and Effective Year Built will be analyzed in a comparison of higher valued
sales and lower valued sales.
6. The assigned appraiser will review the neighborhood for corrections and changes.
ORANGE COUNTY
24 'tif)t.l-F) CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #25
Current Work — Neighborhood Reviews (continued)
Coefficient of Price Related Sias Plot
_P
r
rY • • •
is i•
M90"t6f 6f Sae Rice and ASSOSlad Wliije~))
ORANGE COUNTY
25 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6 Nancy Freeman said the graph in slide #25 shows price related bias. She gave further
7 information in slide #26 regarding the graph.
8
18
1 Slide #26
Current work — 'Neighborhood Reviews (continued)
In the example graph on the previous slide, there is an outlier near the top that skewed
the data.
• 2021 sale price was $43,772 and appraised value is $469,500.
• The 2021 sale was vacant land, which was valued at$44,300 prior to the 2025
revaluation.
• A house was built after the property sold, which has a 2025 value of$374,000 that
contributes to the total value of$469,500.
• This illustrates why outliers need to be identified, researched and excluded, rather
than using the report totals as an obvious sign of issues.
• Removing this outlier changes the PRB from -1.077 to -0.29. The neighborhood still
requires additional review as it is still outside the acceptable range, however the
review of this single outlier exhibits why it is important.
zs ORAINGE CTH OUNATY
2
3
4 Slide #27
Current work — Appeals Countywide
• Informal Appeals total: 3,462 Formal Appeals as of June 30: 365
• 2,551 completed
• 1,403 of which have had some change — 30 of which were
increases
27
ORANGE� C OUN�TY
5
6
7
19
1 Slide #28
Current Work — Appeals Grange County Property Tax
Justice Coalition (OCPTJC)
Information as of June 18, 2025 forRppeals made by OCPTJC, for Habitat for
Humanity properties and properties in Northside District
• 182 properties under appeal
• 54 have been marked as complete
• 15 are commercial properties
• Of the 54 that are complete - 33 experienced a change
• Of the 21 that were not changed: 7 single family, and 1 of those was filed by
OCPTJC
• Of the 54 that are complete, 40 of them are in the name of an LLC or are
exempt properties
ORANGE COUNTY
28 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #29
Current 'Work — Appeals — Orange County Property Tax
Justice Coalition (continued)
• Specifically for neighborhoods of concern to OCPTJC including
NBH 7134, 7200, 7170, 7102, 7032, 7124, 7102, 7104, 4306,
3302, 7130, 7042:
•�*
93 have been marked as complete
*� 63 experienced a change: 60 value decrease, 3 value increase
❖ 30 experienced no change
ORANGE COUNTY
29 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
20
1 Slide #30
Conclusion
• The Tax Office is committed to fair and equitable property
valuations.As the results of the study provided by third
party vendor are reviewed, and the internal reviews are
conducted, any issues revealed will be presented to the
Board of Equalization and Review as quickly as possible
for resolution.
)PIAN C CI'D L i
36
2
3 Nancy Freeman said she planned to have the results of the study available to the Board
4 in September.
5 Commissioner Fowler asked when the vendor will deliver results.
6 Nancy Freeman said she hoped they would receive this information by the end of the
7 week.
8 Commissioner Fowler asked if those results would be available to the Board in
9 September.
10 Nancy Freeman said they would review the results and bring a comprehensive report
11 back to the Board in September, but that she could share the results with the Board once it was
12 received.
13 Commissioner Fowler asked regarding slide #28 what the significance of"LLC' was, and
14 what "exempt" meant in context.
15 Nancy Freeman said exempt properties are for properties that are valued, but the owner
16 would have applied for an exemption. She gave examples of exempt properties: moderate
17 income housing, a church, or a charitable organization.
18 Commissioner Fowler asked if they were exempt from paying taxes.
19 Nancy Freeman said yes.
20 Nancy Freeman said an LLC might be an investment property.
21 Commissioner Fowler asked for clarification on the phrase "weighted mean ratio" on
22 slide #14.
23 Nancy Freeman said the mean ratio is where you look at the sum of appraised values
24 divided by the number of appraised values, and the weighted mean ratio is where you look at
25 the sum of appraised values less the sum of sales prices.
26 Commissioner Fowler said that sounded like a differential rather than a weighted mean
27 ratio. She said they are taking the appraised values, and they are subtracting the actual sales
28 prices.
29 Nancy Freeman said you divide the mean ratio by the weighted mean ratio.
30 Commissioner Fowler said the price rate differential is the mean ratio divided by the
31 weighted mean ratio.
32 Nancy Freeman said that was correct.
33 Vice-Chair Hamilton said that the definition might not be the best way to explain
34 "weighted mean ratio."
35 Chair Bedford asked for more clarification and she and Vice-Chair Hamilton discussed
36 the terms listed on the presentation.
21
1 Nancy Freeman said she would check the definition and then provide an example to the
2 Board.
3 Commissioner Carter thanked Nancy Freeman for the department's work in addressing
4 issues quickly.
5 Commissioner McKee said his concerns were the impact of the tax rate on lower-income
6 residents. He asked about the remaining 1,138 appeals with no information.
7 Nancy Freeman said they received notices of no value change. She said that the state
8 law requires that the property owner demonstrate why the property value is wrong, but that her
9 office reviews every informal appeal even if there isn't much evidence presented. She said
10 those in the informal process have the right to appeal on a formal level which is more in-depth.
11 Commissioner McKee asked what the process is after a property owner receives a "no
12 change" notice. He asked how informal appeals work.
13 Nancy Freeman described the process for informal appeals, which does not always
14 result in a field review. She said for every formal appeal they go out and look at properties. She
15 said they've done field reviews for 10 percent of the informal appeals.
16 Commissioner McKee mentioned that a $300,000 home that is 50 years old is not the
17 same as a $300,000 home that is 5 years old.
18 Nancy Freeman said they take that into consideration, as well as the effective year built
19 which looks at the upgrades to a property.
20 Commissioner McKee thanked her for the information and said he gets a lot of questions
21 about how the process works. He said he understands they cannot go into every property in the
22 county for appraisals.
23 Nancy Freeman said that was correct and that instead they do mass appraisals where
24 some assumptions are made. She said that it is important that owners review the record and
25 appeal if they feel there is something incorrect about the appraisal. She said owners have until
26 July 30 to make an appeal.
27 Vice-Chair Hamilton asked for more information on a time adjusted sales price.
28 Nancy Freeman referred to slide #5. She said they collect sales date from the time of
29 the last revaluation through December 2024. She said that they tend to put the most emphasis
30 on 2023 and 2024 because those are the most recent sales figures. She said there are
31 sometimes situations where they don't have sales in a neighborhood, and they look at older
32 sales.
33 Chad Phillips, Deputy Tax Assessor, said the PRB requires a time-adjusted sale. He
34 said he used the Redfin recommended North Carolina rate of 0.065 per month. He said if you
35 look at a sale that occurred in February 2021, then you apply that rate every month until a
36 January 1, 2025 sale date.
37 Vice-Chair Hamilton clarified that the normal process is to take the sales price in
38 whatever year. She gave an example of a neighborhood that had no sales in 2023 or 2024, but
39 had a sale in 2022. She said they would take that sales price for the property.
40 Nancy Freeman said that they're normal process is to use the sales as they are and not
41 make time adjustments. She said this study will look at the effect of time adjusted sales.
42 Vice-Chair Hamilton asked if the consultant would come up with their own time-adjusted
43 co-efficient or if they were using Redfin.
44 Nancy Freeman said they are only using Redfin internally. She said the consultant
45 would come up with their own rate.
46 Vice-Chair Hamilton said the details matter with how the time-adjustment is calculated.
47 Nancy Freeman said the vendor will use Orange County sales to develop their own time-
48 adjustments. She said they use the Redfin number internally because that's the closest they
49 can get to let them know where they need to recheck properties.
50 Vice-Chair Hamilton said they are developing the revaluation on homes that have
51 actually sold, not on those that haven't, and that doesn't create enough information.
22
1 Nancy Freeman said that is the nature of the sales approach. She said if you don't have
2 enough sales to get the information you are comfortable with, you look at similar neighborhoods
3 and sales that would fit into the same mold. She said there are 130 neighborhoods that have not
4 had sales and they will focus on those neighborhoods after the study because they believe
5 there will be an issue there. She said after they are done looking at the PRD and the PRB, they
6 will get information on those neighborhoods to the Board of Equalization and Review. She said
7 after that they will look at the neighborhoods with no sales.
8 Vice-Chair Hamilton asked why the consultant is looking at census blocks and how they
9 fit with the neighborhoods.
10 Chad Phillips said the study in 2022 used census blocks and they thought to stay in-line
11 with that report.
12 Vice-Chair Hamilton said she wanted to look at that study, because census blocks are
13 only geographical groupings.
14 Nancy Freeman wondered if there was a limitation in the data which led to the use of
15 census blocks.
16 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said according to slide #22 the department identified 44
17 neighborhoods and asked how those were determined.
18 Nancy Freeman said that staff identified 44 and are adding the other 20. She said the
19 44 came from PRDs and they were out of IAAO range.
20 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked where the 40 properties that are LLCs or exempt are
21 located.
22 Nancy Freeman said they are made up of appeals by OCPTJC, Habitat for Humanity,
23 and properties in the Northside district.
24 Commissioner Fowler asked how far back the department goes on sales.
25 Nancy Freeman said January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2024.
26 Commissioner Fowler said there was a rapid rise about a year and a half ago.
27 Nancy Freeman said the county was out of compliance with the sales ratio in 2022.
28 Chair Bedford asked for an explanation of tax rate codes.
29 Nancy Freeman said there are tax rates for each jurisdiction. She said there is one for
30 the towns, for the Chapel Hill Carrboro School District, for the county, for all the fire districts.
31 She gave an example of someone who lived in Efland, that their code would include the county
32 and Efland fire district. She said someone in Chapel Hill has Chapel Hill, the county, and the
33 Chapel Hill Carrboro School District as well.
34 Chair Bedford asked if the tax district is determined by the tax code.
35 Nancy Freeman said it is.
36 Chair Bedford asked if that is too big of an area.
37 Nancy Freeman said it is a way to stratify information and identify where there might be
38 issues. She said they were asked to look at 2024 vs. 2025 values by location. She said that is
39 an effort to look at those geographical areas. She said they are also looking at townships.
40 Chair Bedford asked how equity would be looked at in the census block. She said she
41 was concerned that if an area is too big it would mask problems.
42 Nancy Freeman said looking at it in multiple ways gives them more opportunities to see
43 if there are issues they need to correct.
44 Chair Bedford asked how looking at the land value and the year built affect appraisals.
45 Nancy Freeman gave an example of a neighborhood with one outlier. She said they
46 looked into why it was out of line with all other sales. She said they found it was because it was
47 sold when it was vacant land and then the valuation for 2025 included a house. She said that
48 value in 2025 shouldn't affect whether that neighborhood is properly valued or not. She said the
49 neighborhood is still not within the standards that they are looking to use. She said at that point
50 they look at other sales and see what is wrong. She said it could be the land value or the year
51 built.
23
1 Chair Bedford said looking at the outlier first is an efficient way to begin figuring out why
2 data is skewed. She gave an example of two properties in a neighborhood, one that is a
3 minority owned regular house and one that is a student rental. She said the regular house is
4 valued higher than the rental. She said she was concerned the study wouldn't capture that
5 information.
6 Nancy Freeman said she had seen a similar situation. She said the rental property was
7 under renovation as of January 1, 2025 and only at 10-20% completion. She said when
8 finished, that property will have a value of over $1 million. She said by law, they can only value
9 property at whatever completion point it is at. She said without seeing properties she can't say,
10 she encouraged people to appeal their values if they have concerns.
11 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what the process is for reviewing values after the
12 initial analysis.
13 Nancy Freeman said issues should be caught by the appraiser reviewing that
14 neighborhood after running the sales analysis.
15 Chair Bedford asked how values are affected by major renovations.
16 Nancy Freeman said that new construction is reviewed annually. She said if renovations
17 are done in 2027, they would receive the permit information, but they would use values based
18 on 2025.
19 Commissioner McKee requested a point of privilege to provide a comment before the
20 public made remarks.
21 Chair Bedford granted the privilege.
22 Commissioner McKee said the county is a vassal of the state. He said they cannot
23 exceed what the state allows the county to do. He said there are regulations of how to do
24 revaluations. He said they can set the tax rate, but they cannot re-evaluate properties
25 differently. He said he's spoken with legislators, and it will be difficult to allow age of resident,
26 age of property, tenure of ownership, and income of the resident to be considered. He said
27 there is a law in Texas that freezes property taxes for owners over 65. He said people are
28 caught when they are on fixed incomes and their values increase. He said people need to
29 contact their legislators.
30 Chair Bedford asked for clarification from the County Attorney on what the Board of
31 Commissioners is allowed to do for requesting that properties be reviewed by the Board of
32 Equalization and Review.
33 John Roberts said a random person cannot appeal on someone else's behalf. He said it
34 must be someone with interest in the property.
35 Chair Bedford asked what would happen if the Tax department found an error.
36 John Roberts asked Nancy Freeman to respond to the question.
37 Nancy Freeman said that's what they are doing with the study. She said if they find
38 errors they will take them to the Board of Equalization and Review.
39 John Roberts said what the Tax department does is limited by statute.
40 Commissioner Greene said that the example cited by Commissioner McKee was
41 actually something that only school districts are allowed to do in Texas.
42 Chair Bedford said the actions by the Tax department are short-term and the County
43 Manager will develop a long-term study group to see if there are other more equitable tools that
44 could be used. She said the Board may have to consider if it is more equitable for residents to
45 have a two-year revaluation process.
46
47 PUBLIC COMMENTS:
48 Beverly Walton said she lives in a neighborhood started by her parents. She expressed
49 concern that her taxes will become too high, and she will be unable to leave her child the
50 property. She said it feels like communities like hers are being forced out.
24
1 Horace Johnson said there are community members who are really suffering and are
2 upset. He said that the valuations are unfair and that things need to change. He requested a
3 meeting with the community and Board of Commissioners to discuss these issues.
4 Hudson Vaughn said he is from the North Carolina Housing Coalition. He said that four
5 years ago, Northside neighbors rose up and were told again and again by the county's Tax
6 Office that the values were fair and equitable. He said after a broad-based advocacy effort, the
7 neighborhood was corrected. He said that statistical pieces are complex, but neighbors know a
8 lot about their neighborhoods and their information is critical for data collection and analysis. He
9 said the NC Housing Coalition worked with communities across several counties supporting
10 appeals and helping provide analysis for neighborhood wide adjustments. He said North
11 Carolina's largest county made five neighborhood adjustments with their data analysis despite
12 the fact that they used all these tools and are the best in the state at equity in every national
13 study. He said vertical equity is not enough to address the problems. He said the Tax Office is
14 attempting to prove whether or not there is a problem, not to solve and pinpoint problems. He
15 said that Black communities with 3 times the increase in value compared to white communities
16 with the same market increase. He said that Orange County Tax Office rejected more evidence-
17 based appeals from long term neighbors than his coalition experienced in entire county-wide
18 efforts in other counties. He said the county has powers to correct this.
19 William Gattis said that this is what happens when you intellectualize a process. He said
20 other traditional black areas in Chapel Hill have not been considered. He said property
21 managers have purchased property in these areas and they do not have a vested interest in the
22 community. He said they are the ones driving up values. He said his home needs many
23 renovations, but he can't get a loan to improve it because it does not have a dedicated road. He
24 said the Tax Office said his home is worth more than other homes with more bedrooms and
25 bathrooms.
26 Robert Campbell said the Rogers Road Community Center has received calls for help
27 for several things this week during the storm, but they also received calls requesting help for
28 property taxes. He gave examples of older homes that are valued higher than newer, bigger
29 homes. He said they are being charged for what's going to happen in the future. He said they
30 are experiencing taxation without benefits.
31 Regina Merritt said no one has visited her neighborhood of Councilville and you can't
32 make a fair assessment if you don't go see the properties. She said that people are moving
33 here from other places with higher incomes and are raising property values. She said her
34 community helped build UNC and it has grown in ways that she has not expected. She said
35 that it is not fair the way they are being treated. She said that people should come into the
36 neighborhoods and see the properties. She asked the commissioners to think about adopting
37 some of Commissioner McKee's suggestions.
38 Christina Abernethy said she is with the Marian Cheek Jackson Center and a resident of
39 Carrboro. She said she lives in a historically black neighborhood. She asked the
40 commissioners to consider the appeals were denied supposedly due to lack of evidence, but
41 also to consider the appeals that were not adjusted significantly. She said that she submitted
42 evidence for some appeals that were denied.
43 Michael Jones said he is a community advocacy specialist for the Marian Cheek
44 Jackson Center. He said it was a slap in the face to say that appeals were presented without
45 evidence. He said that community members feel they are not being heard. He said people are
46 concerned about the July 30th deadline.
47 Maria Palmer said the presentation was justifying a system that has been shown to be
48 unfair by using a lot of math and a lot of big group statistics. She said she did not understand
49 and it and suggested that most of the commissioners did not understand it. She said the only
50 way that it makes sense is if you think it's ok to replace residents with rich folks who can afford
51 expensive houses and expensive taxes. She said that the people who presented are
25
1 accountable to the commissioners, and that the commissioners can question what the staff is
2 doing. She said the commissioners can't let them justify what's been done by some consulting
3 company saying some mathematical regression something is ok by national standards because
4 that does not take into account what the properties are really worth. She asked the
5 commissioners to do the right thing and do something for the people in Orange County.
6 Larry Reid said he serves in many roles, and is in construction and represents the
7 Rogers Road community. He said the Board of Commissioners can set the tax rate, so they do
8 have some control. He is concerned about the injustice of how properties are valued by the Tax
9 Office. He said that as a landlord, there is no way he can raise the rent on his properties that
10 will allow him to cover the taxes and maintenance and profit margin he receives. He said he was
11 helped and if they want to give others an opportunity, they must do better than what they are
12 doing now. He said he heard that staff was trying, and he appreciated them for listening. He
13 said that predominantly black neighborhoods do not have paved roads and the same
14 stormwater control systems as other neighborhoods and you can't compare the values.
15 Dolores Bailey asked the Board to consider if the methodology used by the Tax
16 department is really working towards families. She asked that the Board require staff to go back
17 and look at things that aren't quite right before July 30tH
18 Gregory Crapps described the changes in Orange County over the last 54 years. He
19 said that he owns 18 acres, but that he is only allowed to put one house on his property. He
20 said he saw stuff like this in Atlantic City, New Jersey, and that this stuff is by design. He said
21 there is a game that has been played on people for generations and it's time for people to wake
22 up and use their clout to make things happen. He said that there has been poor development in
23 Orange County.
24 Clementine Self said Chapel Hill natives cannot make enough money in retirement or
25 jobs to afford property taxes. She said that UNC is controlling what goes in on in Chapel Hill
26 and it's out of control. She said they don't need an outside agency to tell them when something
27 is wrong, and that common sense should kick in.
28
29 Chair Bedford asked the commissioners if they should postpone item 7-c to a future
30 date.
31
32 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton, to
33 postpone item 7-c to a future date.
34
35 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
36
37 b. Condominium Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding with the Town of
38 Carrboro for the Operation of the Drakeford Library Complex
39 The Board:
40 1) Reviewed the Condominium Agreement, Deeds, and Plat for the Drakeford Library
41 Complex with the Attorney Wayne Hadler who drafted the Agreement;
42 2) Reviewed the Memorandum of Understanding between Orange County and the Town of
43 Carrboro for the operation of the Drakeford Library Complex; and
44 3) Determined when the Condominium Agreement, Deeds, Plat, and Memorandum of
45 Understanding should be brought back to the Board for final approval.
46
47 Alan Dorman, Asset Management Services Director, introduced the item and introduced
48 attorney Wayne Hadler.
49 Wayne Hadler referred to an email sent earlier in the day by Chair Bedford asking
50 several questions about the agreement. He began answering the questions and making
51 suggestions.
26
1 Chair Bedford asked if they should pause and view the presentation first.
2 Alan Dorman said the presentation was prepared prior to receiving the questions and he
3 realized that it does not adequately go over the complexity of the Board's questions.
4 Vice-Chair Hamilton suggested that the item be postponed to a future date.
5 Commissioner McKee agreed.
6 Chair Bedford said there are some key issues. She said one is, how do you break a tie?
7 She that they could have an MOU, but they need to know what the pros and cons are. She said
8 that the declaration gets filed with the Register of Deeds, and that it is easier to change bylaws
9 or MOUs.
10 Wayne Hadler said the MOU would be a working and living document to cover the first
11 couple of years of operation and could be revised. He said that there are two parties, and
12 things are split 50-50. He said a resolution can provide an alternative on how to resolve a
13 dispute that creates a better working relationship. He described some of the thought process
14 for why the MOU was structured the way it was.
15 Chair Bedford said there are also other issues about reserves.
16 Commissioner Greene said she appreciated all the work on this and that she would have
17 voted for the agreement.
18 Chair Bedford said she was not comfortable voting for it.
19
20 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton and seconded by Commissioner McKee to
21 postpone the discussion to a future date.
22
23 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
24
25 c. 2024 Climate Action Plan Annual Report
26 This item was postponed to a future date.
27
28 8. Consent Agenda
29
30 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
31 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
32 . Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
33
34 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
35 approve the consent agenda.
36
37 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
38
39 a. Minutes
40 The Board approved the draft minutes for the May 13, 2025, May 15, 2025, and May 20, 2025
41 BOCC Meetings as submitted by the Clerk to the Board.
42 b. FY 26 and FY 27 Transit Grant Certifications and Pre-Application Documents
43 The Board approved state and federal transit grant certification and pre-application documents
44 for both FY 2026 and 2027, as required by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the
45 North Carolina Department of Transportation Integrated Mobility Division (NCDOT IMD) funding
46 programs.
47 c. Purchase of Replacement Desktop and Laptop Computers
48 The Board approved the purchase of 312 Laptop Computers, 108 Desktop Computers, and 312
49 Docking Stations, including installation services, from Lenovo to replace aging and unsupported
50 computer equipment used by staff throughout Orange County government.
51
27
1 9. County Manager's Report
2 Travis Myren said the county was moving into recovery phase. He said the power and
3 air conditioning was back on at Board of Elections.
4
5 10. County Attorney's Report
6 John Roberts had no report.
7
8 11. *Appointments
9 None.
10
11 12. Information Items
12 • June 17, 2025 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
13 • Memorandum - Improvements to Fairview Community Park
14 • May 2025 Child Care Subsidy Monthly Report
15
16 13. Closed Session
17 A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Carter to
18 enter in to closed session at 9:52 p.m. pursuant to North Carolina General Statute § 143
19 318.11.(a)(9) "to discuss and take action regarding plans to protect public safety as it relates to
20 existing or potential terrorist activity and to receive briefings by staff members, legal counsel, or
21 law enforcement or emergency service officials concerning actions taken or to be taken to
22 respond to such activity," and pursuant to North Carolina General Statute § 143-318.11(a)(3) "to
23 consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the
24 attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body related to Zander and
25 Galloway v. Orange County," and for the approval of closed session minutes.
26
27 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
28
29 Reconvene into Regular Session
30
31 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
32 reconvene into regular session at 10:55 p.m.
33
34 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
35
36
37 14. Adjournment
38
39 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
40 adjourn the meeting at 10:55 p.m.
41
42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
43
44 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair
45
46
47 Recorded by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board
48
49 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board