Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025_10_29 BOER Minutes Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 MINUTES Orange County Board of Equalization and Review Meeting held on October 29, 2025 Board Members in attendance: Chair of the Board Leon Meyers Yes Regular Member Saru Salvi Yes Regular Member Richal Vanhook Yes Alternate Member Shareese Alston No Alternate Member Hunter Beattie No Alternate Member Tony Blake No Alternate Member Vaughn Compton No Alternate Member Shannon Julian No Alternate Member Barbara Levine No Orange County Staff in attendance: Tax Administrator Nancy Freeman Office Assistant Jennifer Rigsbee Deputy Tax Assessor Chad Phillips Real Property Appraisal Manager Roger Gunn Chief Appraiser Kelly Wells Temporary Appraiser Assistant Rob Teachout Appraiser C le Anderson Appraiser Bill Hiltbold Appraiser Jimmy Milliken Appraiser Scott Zeman Staff Attorney Martha Bordogna Meeting Schedule: No. Time Appellant PIN or Abstract Appeared Appeal Type 1 I 1:OOPM Harry Reeves Halpin 9759043051 Yes Value-Real 2 1:22PM Samantha Reece Rayman 9864477672 Yes Value-Real 3 1:24PM Michael Owino 9799447715.020 No Value-Real 4 1:29PM Jiakun Wu 9864680982 No Value-Real 5 1:35PM Sandra Douglass 9789765535 Yes Value-Real 6 1:49PM John Lyon 9873258547 Yes Value-Real 7 1:55PM Dmitry A. Gordenin 9880504358 No Value-Real 8 2:08PM Teresa Perry Williams 9873258978 Yes Value-Real 9 3:36PM Ann Henkels 9789924945 Remote Value-Real 10 3:54PM Akram Khaksari 9789839303 Yes Value-Real Time B Meeting called to order 1:OOPM Leon Meyers Meeting adjourned 4:17PM Leon Meyers Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41`0 Motion Time By Second To move into recess 2:02PM Leon Meyers Saru Salvi To return to order 2:07PM Leon Meyers Richal Vanhook Motion Time By Second To move into recess 2:30PM Leon Meyers Saru Salvi To return to order 3:35PM Leon Meyers Richal Vanhook Related meeting notes: After discussion with staff attorney Martha Bordogna, the current Board made a recommendation that the 2026 Board of Equalization and Review establish the following policy related to commercial tax value appeals only. This policy aligns with NC Property Tax Commission policy. Qualified Representatives of Property Owner Entities • In a tax value appeal hearing, a qualified representative of the owner entity(as defined by the NCDOR BOER Manual and G.S. 105-290(d2)) must be present(*see exception below). • Qualified representatives include: o An officer, manager, or member-manager of the entity. o An employee whose income is reported on IRS Form W-2, provided the entity has authorized such representation in writing. o An owner of the business entity, if the owner's interest in the entity is at least 25%and the entity provides written authorization for representation. Use of Non-Attorney Consultants • If a business entity elects to use a non-attorney consultant,the entity is required to complete Form AV-63, and the form must be signed before a notary public. • The owner entity's qualified representative must be physically present at the hearing unless the entity is represented by a licensed attorney. Calling Witnesses: • A qualified representative or an attorney may call witnesses during the hearing, including property tax consultants who are not attorneys, to provide testimony or evidence relevant to the property's valuation or other issues under review. *Representation by Attorneys: When a property owner entity is represented by a licensed attorney,the presence of a qualified representative of the owner entity is not required at the hearing. The Board's current policy related to representation for appeals of residential property tax values remains unchanged. Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E4F0 Property Identification: Property Owner Harry Reeves Halpin Appellant(if different) Property Address 2601 Pussycat Lane Parcel ID or Abstract 19759043051 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of the access road, the fact that the property does not perc and due to existing easement on the property. Current Assessed Value $288,600 ounty Opinion $202,400 Time of Hearin 1:00PM Appellant Opinion $150,000 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $202,400 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Off a private road in bad shape • Land does not perc and no more room for septic tanks • Not comparable to other nearby sales due to issues • Neighbors septic easements and leach fields Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is 10.32 acres of land with a shed and a single wide manufactured home owned by someone else and taxed as personal property. • While the soil evaluation report confirms the property is suitability for a septic system,the specialized requirements and associated costs may impact its value, depending on the preferences and priorities of potential buyers. • Due to the septic fields and easements, only about 65%- 70%of the land is buildable and this portion has perc issues requiring specialized septic alternatives. • The road leading to the property is a private road that has deferred maintenance and is in very poor shape. • Based on these factors, The County recommends increasing the land adjustment from -35%to - 55%and removing the old home from the yard items as it is no longer on the property, reducing the total value from$288,600 to $202,400. Land: $193,000 Yard Items: $8,700 Total: $202,400 • GIS Map • Survey • Aerial of comparable property • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $202,400 Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Samantha Reece Rayman Appellant(if different) Property Address 315 Lakeshore Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19864477672 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the purchase price of the property and comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $442,200 ounty Opinion 1 $399,100 Time of Hearin 1:22PM Appellant Opinion $390,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $399,100 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that the subject's sale price, along with comparable sales in the area, are among the reasons for filing this appeal. The appellant further indicates that the structure has several issues that require remediation.A recent offer-to-purchase contract and a property inspection report were provided as supporting documentation. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property consists of 1.73 acres with a 1,657-square-foot single-family dwelling located at 315 Lakeshore Drive in Hillsborough. The appellant provided an offer-to-purchase contract and a recent inspection report as supporting documentation. • The County reviewed the appellant's evidence,which included an inspection report dated May 1, 2025. County staff also visited the property for physical verification and photos. Please note that the appellants recently purchased the subject property, closing on June 3, 2025, for $410,000. • After review, the County recommends the following physical changes: - Reduce the effective year built from 1980 to 1970 - Correct the size of the storage building - Apply additional depreciation to the storage building - Apply an additional 10%physical depreciation to the single-family dwelling - Change the Attached Addition(AA) foundation from Masonry(MS)to Slab • These adjustments result in a revised assessed value of$399,100. The County recommends adopting this revised value for the subject property. • Photo of Subject • GIS Map • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $399,100 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 Property Identification: Prove Provertv Owner Michael Owino Appellant(if different) Property Address 20 Banbury Lane Parcel ID or Abstract 9799447715.020 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of the home,purchase price and comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $258,800 ounty Opinion $258,800 Time of Hearin 1:24PM Appellant Opinion $220,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $258,800 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that condition,purchase price, and comparable sales are the basis for this appeal. The appellant also notes that the home has not been improved and does not include a sun room. No supporting documentation or evidence was provided with this appeal. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 1,492-square-foot condominium located at 20 Banbury Lane in Chapel Hill. The appellant asserts an opinion of value of$220,000 but did not provide any supporting documentation with the appeal. • County staff reviewed the appeal and analyzed three recent comparable sales within the subject's neighborhood. The analysis indicates that the subject property's current assessed value is consistent with market-supported values for similar units. Therefore,the County recommends no change to the current assessment of$258,800. • Photo of Subject • GIS Map • Sales Analysis • Current Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $258,800 No Change in Value Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Jiakun Wu Appellant if different Property Address 403 Terrell Road Parcel ID or Abstract 19864680982 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on comparable sales. Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 Current Assessed Value $265,200 County Opinion $170,900 Time of Hearin 1:29PM Appellant Opinion $220,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $170,900 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • $220K is justified based on comparable sales around January 1, 2025 as well as the available listings started around January 1,2025. • The appellant provided several comparable properties to support their opinion of value. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 0.31-acre tract improved with a 1,344-square-foot single-family residence located at 403 Terrell Road in Hillsborough.The appellant contends that recent sales and listings support their opinion of value. • County staff conducted a field inspection for verification purposes. Based on observed conditions, the County recommends the following adjustments: - Reduce the effective year built from 1989 to 1969 - Change the condition from Average to Poor - Apply an additional 25%physical depreciation • These adjustments are supported by field observations and result in a revised assessed value of $170,900. • Photos of Subject • GIS Map • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Coun 's Proposed Value: $170,900 Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Sandra Douglass Appellant(if different) Property Address 613 Kensington Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19789765535 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the value of comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $760,700 ounty Opinion 1 $737,400 Time of Hearin 1:35PM Appellant Opinion Not provided County Representative Roger Gunn Board Decision $737,400 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that the revaluation of the land lacks a size adjustment coefficient and therefore appears to arbitrarily list all land values of properties and com arables at the same Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 $450,000 value with few exceptions. The appellant highlighted the exceptions in the documentation. • The appellant also states that their home has had minimal upgrades, and many of the comparable properties have undergone major renovations. However,the appellant did not state which homes have had such renovations. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The appellant is correct that most properties in the neighborhood have a$450,000 land value with few exceptions. That is because the properties in NBC 7498 Coker Hills are valued based on the residential lot method as provided for in the Urban Land Schedule on page 62 of the Land Appraisal section of the 2025 Reappraisal Schedule of Rules, Standards, and Values for Market Value and Present-Use Value(SOV). To speak to specific neighborhood properties the appellant highlighted as having a lower assessed land value: 600 Kensington Drive is owned by the Town and has a-99%adjustment for being in the flood zone and floodway. 601 Kensington Drive has a-20%adjustment for being in a flood zone. 626 and 628 Kensington Drive have-10%adjustments for being partially in a flood zone and 630 Kensington Drive has a-5%adjustment for also being partially in a flood zone offsetting an otherwise positive adjustment for its significantly larger size. 211 Huntington Drive has a-10% adjustment for having a power line easement along the rear of the site. As the subject is not affected by a flood zone or power line or is significantly smaller or larger in size than the typical lots in the neighborhood,no adjustment to the land value is recommended. • With regard to the subject's lack of updating,the County recommends reducing the effective year built from 1999 to 1989 (36 year effective age), a 15 year difference from its 1974 actual year built. This change would reduce the value of the subject property to$737,400. • Location Map of Subject • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $737,400 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner I John Lyon Appellant(if different) Property Address 1126 Horton Road Parcel ID or Abstract 19873258547 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the buying/selling restrictions placed on the property by Habitat for Humanity. Current Assessed Value $240,400 ounty Opinion 1 $187,100 Time of Hearin 1:49PM Appellant Opinion $150,000 County Representative Roger Gunn Board Decision $187,100 Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E4F0 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant is appealing the value of this home due to this home being a Habitat for Humanity home that is subject to affordability and other restrictions that impact the market value of the home in the buying/selling process. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 792 square foot one story townhome developed and built by Habitat for Humanity of Orange County in the Crescent Magnolia development of Waterstone in Hillsborough. The appellant purchased the home in December 2019 for$150,000. • Based on an analysis of the restrictions put in place by Habitat for this and other homes in the Crescent Magnolia development, The County recommends reducing the value of the land by 25%and the value of the residence by 25%for a revised value of$187,100. This is consistent with the adjustments being made by the County to other homes in this development subject to the same restrictions as the subject. • Location Map of Subject • Current Property Record Card of Subject • Proposed Property Record Card of Subject Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $187,100 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Dmitry A. Gordenin A ellant if different Property Address 106 Hampton Court I Parcel ID or Abstract 19880504358 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $536,900 ounty Opinion $512,700 Time of Hearin 1:55PM Appellant Opinion $484,000 County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $511,200 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Recent comparable sales through the entire 2023-2024 period should be considered only from the attached pdf file of comparable properties,which are located in North Forest Hills subdivision. Other properties shown on the map as comparable are located in Lake Ellen neighborhood,where prices are higher because this is a more favorable location. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Please see the before sales analysis. These are 2023-24 sales of homes in the subject neighborhood, all $300K land value, 1 story, C+10 grade, and within 120 square feet of the Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 subject's living area. Notice at the bottom of the total assessed value column,the subject is valued$24 to $26K above the average/median of the comparables. • I measured and corrected the front and back decks which are slightly larger than the 2024 sketch and the driveway is cracked and buckled. The county proposes changing the "good" physical condition in depreciation to "average" and the effective year built from 2001 to 1993. • If the board accepts these changes the building value would decrease from$234,700 to $210,500. Total property value would change from$536,900 to $512,700. • GIS Map • Photos of Subject • Sales analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $511,200 Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Teresa Perry Williams Appellant(if different) Property Address 221 Monarda Way Parcel ID or Abstract 9873258978 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the value of a comparable property. Current Assessed Value $500,800 ounty Opinion $478,800 Time of Hearin 2:08PM Appellant Opinion $470,000 County Representative Scott Zeman Board Decision $478,800 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The subject property should be valued equitably with 244 Rubrum Drive(PIN 9873360005). Both units have the same square footage and floor plan,but 244 Rubrum Drive has lower valuation due to a 5%design depreciation and a lower effective year built than the subject property. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • A county appraiser conducted a site review of the property on 10/23/2025. The appellant was notified by email and granted the appraiser permission to take photographs and verify property characteristics. Exterior photographs were taken by the appraiser.No interior photographs were obtained. • Appraiser observations and recommendations: ➢ GRADE: The residence has a grade of A-10. End unit townhouses in Waterstone Terraces have A-10 grades while interior units have B+10 grades. The subject is an end unit. No change to grade is recommended. Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E4F0 ➢ AGE: The residence was built in 2016 and has a current effective year built of 2019. The county recommends the effective year built be changed to 2016 based on an equity analysis. ➢ CONDITION/DEPRECIATION: The residence is currently in Average condition. The county recommends adding a-5%design depreciation factor for subject having only 2.5 baths. Properties with similar square footages that have recently sold have 3.5 baths. This change is also equity based. ➢ BUILDING SKETCH: The current property sketch is missing a slab foundation. The county recommends adding a slab foundation to the property sketch. ➢ EQUITY ANALYSIS: The appellant presents a valid argument for the subject to be valued equitably with 244 Rubrum Drive. After an informal appeal in 2025, 244 Rubrum Drive was given a-5%depreciation factor for having 2.5 bedrooms, and its effective year built was reduced to 2016. The county recommends the same changes for the subject property. • With these changes,the county recommends a value adjustment from$500,800 to$478,800. • Photos of Subject • Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $478,800 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Ann Henkels Appellant(if different) Property Address 106 Meadowbrook Drive I Parcel ID or Abstract 19789924945 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the value of comparable properties. Current Assessed Value $544,800 County Opinion 1 $544,800 Time of Hearin 3:36PM Appellant Opinion 1 $330,000 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision 1 $464,800 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The house is valued correct,but the land is not based on the different land sizes on Meadowbrook Drive. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • Property Review Summary— 106 Meadowbrook Drive(NBC 7445) • The subject property is located in NBC 7445 at 106 Meadowbrook Drive. It was constructed in 1957 and contains approximately 1,823 square feet of living area. Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 • The home is in fair condition and carries an additional 20%depreciation to reflect its age and physical state. The land is lot-valued, determined through vacant land sales and the extraction method. The construction grade has been verified as accurate. • A valuation model was developed using a base land value,which was then applied to neighborhood sales and adjusted as necessary to achieve a consistent median ratio across the neighborhood. Where lot size variations demonstrated measurable positive or negative impacts on sales prices, corresponding lot value adjustments were applied to maintain equity and uniformity. • An analysis of similar-sized homes within NBC 7445 was completed, and the results indicate that the subject property's current assessed value remains accurate and supported by market data. • Based on this review and analysis,the County recommends no change to the current valuation. • Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Maps • Aerial Photo Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $464,800 Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner I Akram Khaksari A ellant if different Property Address 1115 N Estes Drive I Parcel ID or Abstract 19789839303 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on a comparable sale. Current Assessed Value $400,000 ounty Opinion $400,000 Time of Hearin 3:54PM Appellant Opinion $250,000 County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $385,000 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • This is just vacant land and there is no house on it. The next door house just sold a few months back for$550,000(House+land). How can my land be worth$400,000? Evidence submitted by the county representative: • An adjoining property to the east of the subject and sharing a driveway has a land value of $400,000 and total assessed value of$569,700. It sold for$555,000 in April of 2025 and while this sale cannot be considered in the 2025 revaluation, it implies the $400,000 land value reasonable for the subject. • The county recommends no change in value. • Photo of Subject • GIS Ma Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 • Adjoining sale • Current Property Record Card Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $385,000 Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Consent Agenda: Motion of the Board Accept Proposed Consent Agenda?: Yes Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Notes: Please see the attached Consent Agenda list. Chair of the B ig6uSigned by: Leon Meyers 11/14/2025 Recording Secret cuSigned by: Jennifer Rigsbee KOSlat, 11/14/2025 Docusign Envelope ID:6A24285A-81 BA-45BO-BD68-Cl1 D7E41 E41F0 CONSENT AGENDA Orange County Board of Equalization and Review October 29, 2025 Parcel ID Owner Name Current Recommended Reason forchange Date Value Value Signed 9832618911 Eric Dashman $134,855 $117,998 Land adjustment due to easement 10/24/25 9789987551 Philip Sloane $2,540,700 $2,066,500 Land and grade adjustments 10/24/25 9788590084 Jonathan $1,189,900 $1,139,800 Third party appraisal-reduced grade and effective yr, data 10/24/25 Schoolar corrections 9788696255 Jonathan $2,840,700 $2,590,900 Third party appraisal-reduced grade and eff yr 10/24/25 Schoolar 9835598412 Kerri A Bray $527,400 $446,200 Land influence -30% (LL) 10/28/25 9767695549 Allen J Jacob $909,600 $797,100 ADU to SFYI 'Off ice'(LL) 10/28/25 9769997496 Robert $811,400 $723,500 ADU to SFYI 'Office'(LL) 10/28/25 Berkowitz