The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2025_11_11 BOER Minutes Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E MINUTES Orange County Board of Equalization and Review Meeting held on November 11, 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 PUV Compliance Review Appraiser Dana Hall Appraiser C le Anderson Appraiser Louise Benson-Lochner Appraiser Bill Hiltbold Appraiser Jimmy Milliken Appraiser Heidi Whetzel Meeting Schedule: No. Time Appellant PIN or Abstract Appeared Appeal Type 1 1:01PM Stacia Cook Ontjes 9788157546 Yes Value-Real 2 1:28PM Elizabeth Satterlee 9789477597 Yes Value-Real 3 1:50PM Silas Wong 9787515200 Yes Value-Real 4 1:59PM Silas Wong 9787513647 Yes Value-Real 5 2:03PM Heman H. Robinson III 9862904836 Yes Value-Real 6 2:26PM Jared A. Knight 9789428152 Yes Value-Real 7 2:36PM Laura Wilson 9779162111 No Value-Real 8 2:48PM Christine Krug 9779712898 No Value-Real 9 2:55PM Mark Emamian 9891215932 Yes Value-Real 10 3:23PM Mark Siegel 9779240155 Yes Value-Real 11 3:41PM David Kaminski 9778486372 No Value-Real 12 3:47PM Paulo Ferreira 9870206372 No Value-Real 13 3:52PM Elizabeth C. Dalehite 9831395073 No Value-Real 14 4:OOPM Polly T. Mebane 9835631421 Yes Value-Real 15 4:40PM Gronks Doghouse LLC 9788703688 Yes Value-Real Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E 16 1 4:54PM Shayna Hill 9788240329 Yes Value-Real Time B Meeting called to order 1:OOPM Leon Meyers Meeting adjourned 5:23PM Leon Meyers Motion Time By Second To move into recess 2:40PM Leon Meyers Saru Salvi To return to order 2:45PM Leon Meyers Richal Vanhook Related meeting notes: • Leon Meyers brought forward a concern about the new process of receiving the agenda only one day prior to a meeting date, stating that this does not allow a reasonable amount of time for the Board members to review evidence. Chad Phillips encouraged the Board to utilize Spatialest to review evidence for upcoming appeals. Appeal documentation is available for review several days prior to the scheduled meeting date the majority of the time. • Due to concerns that appellants have expressed feelings of intimidation when appearing to present their appeal to the Board of Equalization and Review, the Tax Staff thought it may help to reduce the number of staff members present during the meetings.Nancy Freeman and Chad Phillips will rotate the days or time periods that they cover the meetings. Jennifer Rigsbee and Rob Teachout will do the same. • The meeting scheduled for Wednesday,November 12,2025 has been canceled. • Chad Phillips let the Board know that the neighborhood reviews are almost complete. Knowing that upcoming appeals will be affected by the results of the reviews,the Tax Staff felt it would be best to reschedule those appeals to a later date. The appeals have been rescheduled for December 10, 2025. This will be a full day of appeals specific to properties that are located in the neighborhoods that were reviewed. • Three additional full days of appeals have been added to the Board of Equalization and Review calendar in order to complete the remaining appeals for 2025. The dates are December 16`", 17`" and 18t`. Property Identification: Property Owner Stacia Cook ontjes Appellant(if different) Property Address 128 Basnight Lane Parcel ID or Abstract 9788157546 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on an independent appraisal and the need for a lot size adjustment. Current Assessed Value $502,600 ounty Opinion $448,600 Time of Hearin 1:01PM Appellant Opinion $410,000 County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision $429,000 Evidence submitted by the appellant: Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E • Please see attached appraisal from 3/23/2023. Please note the building sketch is incorrect as there are only 2 bedrooms in this property. • Equity Issue: There are several other properties on this same street-Basnight Lane-that already have a 10%lot size adjustment,but this property does not. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • On November 7th, the subject property was inspected by an appraiser. Based on the observed condition of the property, it is recommended that the effective year built be adjusted to 1967 and a-10%easement influence added to the lot. • While there is market evidence supporting the current assessed value,the comparable properties used appear to have undergone significant upgrades and renovations that the subject property has not received. • Recommended Adjustments: Change Effective Year Built to 1967 Add-10%Easement Influence to Lot • After these changes, the new recommended value for the property is$448,600. • 7124 Sales Analysis • Comparable Report • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card • Photos of Subject • GIS Map Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $429,000 Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Elizabeth Satterlee Appellant(if different) Property Address 108 Old Forest Creek Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 19789477597 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on an independent appraisal. Current Assessed Value $350,000 ounty Opinion 1 $350,000 Time of Hearin 1:28PM Appellant Opinion $150,000 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision $350,000 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • In October 2023,both 108 Old Forest Creek Drive and 112 Old Forest Creek Drive(parcels 9789477597& 9789478606)were appraised as part of the same appraisal process. The total appraised value of both properties was $945,000 compared to an assessed value of$1,149,800 (difference of$204,800). As part of the appraisal process, a value of$150,000 was assigned to Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E the land for both parcels compared to$700,000 that was assessed for tax purposes across both parcels. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a vacant lot located in NBC 7460 (Forest Creek)at 108 Old Forest Creek Drive. • The parcel was included in an appraisal prepared for lending purposes that combined 108 and 112 Old Forest Creek Drive under a single valuation. The lending contract is dated September 25, 2023,with an effective appraisal date of October 3,2023. The appraisal assigns a combined value of$150,000 for both lots and references one listing for the subject property and one for 112 Old Forest Creek Drive(0.35 acres/ 15,246 square feet). The report does not provide specific details or a separate valuation for the subject parcel alone, nor any support for the $150,000 combined land valuation. • A sales analysis of County records was completed to support existing land values, along with a review of the comparable sales used in the submitted appraisal to compare land valuation trends across Orange County. • Per Orange County Register of Deeds,the properties are not legally combined and are therefore valued individually in accordance with the County's Schedule of Values. Additionally,because this was a multi-parcel sale, it is classified as an unqualified sale and not used as a primary indicator of market value. • Lots within NBC 7460 are currently assigned a base land value of$350,000, and the subject property has been valued accordingly. Based on the supporting documentation and analyses, the County recommends no change to the current assessed value. • Sales analysis • Appraisal analysis • Maps • NBC Analysis Report • Current Property Record Card • GIS Map Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $350,000 No Change in Value Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For Voted Against Saru Salvi Property Identification: Property Owner Silas Wong Appellant(if different) Property Address Unimproved 3.83 acre Parcel ID or Abstract 9787515200 parcel on Old Orchard Road Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on an independent appraisal. Current Assessed Value 1 $398,800 County Opinion 1 $279,200 Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E Time of Hearin 1:50PM Appellant0pinion $327,127 County Re resentative Kelly Wells Board Decision $279,200 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Recent purchase of this parcel(9787515200) ,which was bought together with adjacent parcel and house(9787513647)was executed at a sale price of$1,145,000 total for both parcels. Assuming the same parcel: parcel ratio of value used in the Orange County Tax Appraisal,then this parcel would have a market value of$327,127 per recent purchase price. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is 3.83 acres of vacant land located off Old Orchard Road in Chapel Hill. • The subject property sold with another property in May 2025 for$1,145,000 and an appraisal was done for the lender at the time of the sale recommending a value of$1,030,000. Both the sale and the appraisal are outside the scope of the revaluation dates. • Based on physical attributes of the property,the County recommends adding an adjustment on the land of-30%for access and the streams throughout the property resulting in a revised value from $398,800 to $279,200. • GIS Map • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $279,200 Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Silas Wong Appellant(if different) Property Address 910 Old Orchard Road Parcel ID or Abstract 9787513647 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on an independent appraisal. Current Assessed Value $995,900 County Opinion $855,700 Time of Hearin 1:59PM Appellant Opinion $817,873 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $855,700 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Recent appraisal of this home(9787513647) ,which was bought together with adjacent land parcel(9787515200)was determined to be$1,030,000 total for both parcels. Assuming the same parcel: parcel ratio of value used in the Orange County Tax Appraisal,then this parcel would have a value of$735,729 per third party appraisal. Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 3,432 square foot single family home with 5 bedrooms, 3 and 1/2 baths on 6.35 acres located at 910 Old Orchard Road in Chapel Hill. • The subject property sold with another property in May 2025 for$1,145,000 and an appraisal was done for the lender at the time of the sale recommending a value of$1,030,000. Both the sale and the appraisal are outside the scope of the revaluation dates. • Based on physical attributes of the property,The County recommends: *adding an adjustment to the land of-30%for topography and shape *correcting the bath count to 3 full and 2 half baths *correcting the fireplace count from 2 to 3 The recommended adjustments would result in a revised value from $995,900 to $855,700. • Photo of subject • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $855,700 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Heman H. Robinson III Appellant(if different) Property Address 1017 Starfield Circle Parcel ID or Abstract 19862904836 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on incorrect data on the current property record card and on comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $838,200 County Opinion $838,200 Time of Hearin 2:03PM Appellant Opinion $750,000 County Representative Louise Benson- Board Decision $780,200 Lochner Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant filed a formal appeal on May 6,2025. • The appellant: Supplied an MLS listing of the subject from 2010 notating the finished living area is 2813square feet. Supplied a Comper report with 2 comparable sales. • No additional evidence e.g.photos,repair bids, comparable sales were provided. Evidence submitted by the county representative: Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E • Appraiser observations and recommendations: ➢ The MLS listing from 2010 noted the finished square footage is 2,813. The current County record of 2,917 square feet is within 4%.of the MLS listed square footage. Due to no valid sketch provided(e.g.,building plans or fee appraisal), a change in square footage is not recommended. ➢ The Effective Year Built of the subject is the same as the Actual Year Built of 2006 (19 years). ➢ The Grade of A+20 is appropriate for the style and quality;no change is recommended. ➢ The 4.48 acre site has an area to the rear of the site that falls into a flood plain. A-25% factor has been applied;no change is recommended. ➢ Comper Reports: Land- see Comper for land value with 3 GIS maps for the comps. NBC 7936 has only 10 parcels of which there were no sales in the qualified time period. The comps supplied are in close proximity to the subject and substantiates the land value. Improvements - see Comper for improvement value. Comparable sales supplied by the Appellant are Comps 1 &2. The grade of these comps are substantially inferior to the subject and therefore are not considered to be in market competition. Comps 3-8 have been supplied to substantiate the improvement value. There are varying degrees of grade, square footage, actual and effective age which bracket the subject. • It is the appraisers opinion that the evidence supplied by the appellant does not support a reduction in the current assessed value of$838,200. • Current Property Record Card • Photos of Improvements -Current&MLS • Maps -Location&GIS • Land comper with GIS maps of the comps • Improvement comper with MLS photos of the comps Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $780,200 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Jared A. Knight Appellant(if different) Property Address 104 Songbird Lane Parcel ID or Abstract 9789428152 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on comparable sales,the condition of the home on Jan. 1,2025, and an independent appraisal. Current Assessed Value $1,098,200 ounty Opinion $950,900 Time of Hearin 2:26PM Appellant Opinion $800,000 County Representative C le Anderson Board Decision $950,900 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant provided three comparable sales and one equity comparable to support their opinion of value. The appellant also states that the dwelling was damaged as of January 1, Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E 2025, and supplied photos as supporting documentation. Lastly,the appellant provided a fee appraisal dated 4/22/2022 with an opinion of value of$978,000. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 0.36-acre tract with a 3,306-square-foot single-family dwelling located at 105 Songbird Lane in Chapel Hill. County staff visited the property for physical verification and photos. The County also reviewed the appellant's supporting documentation, which included three recently sold properties and one equity comparable. • Two of the comparable sales required-15%lot size adjustments, reducing their adjusted lot assessments to $212,500. All three sales, as well as the equity comparable, reflected lower quality grades than the subject property. For this reason,these comparables were given limited consideration. The County also reviewed a sales analysis demonstrating significant volatility in price per square foot among neighborhood sales. These variations were primarily attributed to differing quality grades among dwellings. Accordingly,the County placed greater emphasis on the fee appraisal submitted by the appellant. • The appellant submitted a fee appraisal dated April 22,2022,with an opinion of value of $978,000. County staff also reviewed the sale of the subject property in May 2022 for $1,102,000,noting it was originally listed on April 7,2022, for$925,000. • After review, the County recommends the following changes: - Reduce the Quality Grade from AA to A+70 - Lower the Effective Year Built from 2017 to 2012 These adjustments would align the assessment more closely with the appellant's appraisal conclusions. • The appellant provided photos showing the property's condition as of January 1,2025, and stated in the accompanying email that approximately 10-15%of the dwelling was under repair or renovation at that time. To reflect this,the County recommends applying a 15%Percentage Completion Remaining(PCR) adjustment to the dwelling. • With these proposed adjustments,the County recommends a revised assessed value of $950,900 for the subject property. • Photo of Subject • GIS Map • Appellant Email • Sales Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $950,900 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Laura Wilson Appellant(if different) Property Address 103 Circadian Way Parcel ID or Abstract 19779162111 Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on comparable sales and the condition of the townhome. Current Assessed Value $386,200 County Opinion $366,600 Time of Hearin 2:36PM Appellant Opinion $310,000 County Representative Kelly Wells Board Decision $366,600 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Price per square foot of comparable sales • House is small with no doors on most rooms,no washer/dryer and only one small closet • No AC,28 year solar panels for heat and gas pack for radiant floor heating • No updates or renovations Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a townhome with 952 square feet; 1 bedroom and 1 & 1/2 baths built in 1997 located in the Arcadia community in Chapel Hill. • Arcadia is a 33-home co-housing community with a shared common house, gardens, and walking trails. The land in the neighborhood is lot priced; the median lot size is .06 acres. • Based on review of the property,the County recommends reducing the effective year built from 2002 to the actual year built of 1997and increasing the layout depreciation from 10%to 20%resulting in a revised valuation from$386,200 to$366,600. • Photo of Subject • GIS Map • Sales and Equity Analysis • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $366,600 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Christine Krug Appellant(if different) Property Address 108 Amber Court Parcel ID or Abstract 9779712898 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on a 2016 independent appraisal and incorrect data on the current property record card. Current Assessed Value $572,500 ounty Opinion $572,500 Time of Hearin 2:48PM Appellant Opinion $450,000 County Representative Heidi Whetzel Board Decision $572,500 Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant asserts that the property should be assessed as a one-bedroom,one-bathroom dwelling. While there are three rooms on the upper level,two lack closets and therefore should not be classified as bedrooms. The appellant also notes that the two rooms located below grade should not be counted as finished bedrooms for assessment purposes. Additionally,the appellant references a 2016 appraisal,which they believe supports a reduction in the assessed value. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is located at 108 Amber Court in Carrboro. A site visit was conducted on November 5, 2025. The dwelling is in average condition, with both the actual and effective year built of 1987. The comparables provided by the appellant are not considered valid, as all are multi-story dwellings without finished basements. The property is currently listed with two bedrooms; however, it should be listed as having three.A sales analysis indicates that the current assessment is supported by comparable sales in the area. The 2016 appraisal submitted by the appellant reports 2,330 square feet of living area,which is within 5%of the County's recorded 2,322 square feet. Therefore, the only recommended change is to update the bedroom count from two to three, which does not affect the assessed value. • The County recommends no change to the current assessment. • Photo of Subject • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card • Sales Analysis • GIS Map Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $572,500 No Change in Value Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owneton rk Emamian Appellant(if different) Property Addreimproved 1.58 acre lot Parcel ID or Abstract 9891215932 Mimosa Drive Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the fact that this property is used as a wastewater spray field for the adjoining parcel. Current Assessed Value $92,800 ounty Opinion $92,800 Time of Hearin 2:55PM Appellant Opinion $100 County Representative Jimmy Milliken Board Decision $92,800 Evidence submitted by the appellant: Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E • This land is for a wastewater spray field. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is a 1.58 acre vacant lot on Mimosa Drive located in NBC 7408 (Birchwood Lake). • Neighborhood NBC 7408 is valued using the AC-9 pricing table,which establishes a base land rate of$250,000. The subject parcel is unimproved, and its potential for development is unknown. • In accordance with County valuation practices,non-perking or non-buildable parcels—those unable to support conventional septic systems or residential improvements—receive a 75% reduction in land value to reflect limited utility and marketability. The subject property currently reflects this -75%land adjustment in its valuation. This is consistent with the adjustment the parcel received from 2021-2024 when the AC-9 pricing for this neighborhood was $200,000. • Based on the evidence and current valuation standards,the County recommends no change to the existing assessed value. • Current Property Record Card • GIS Map Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $92,800 No Change in Value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Mark Siegel Appellant(if different) Property Address 211 Cates Farm Road I Parcel ID or Abstract 19779240155 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on comparable sales. Current Assessed Value $935,200 ounty Opinion $927,700 Time of Hearin 3:23PM Appellant Opinion $800,000 County Representative Bill Hiltbold Board Decision $855,300 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The recent comparable home sales in the neighborhood provided by your own site do not support this valuation. Especially given the current interest rates, economic climate and the age of this house. There are many more recently built homes going up in the neighborhood which will put downward pressure on the value of our home. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The sales analysis for neighborhood 7788 lists all 2023 and 2024 sales with the exception of 201 Rock Garden Drive,which is considered unsuitable since a power line crossing the Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E property devalues the land 40%in the county record. The mean sale price per square foot is $297 and the median sales price per square foot is$292, so the subject's total value per square foot of$294 is between the mean and median. • I visited the property and found the deck is slightly smaller than on the property record and needs maintenance. The county recommends reducing the effective year built from 2014 to 2012 which reduces the total value per square foot to$292 which is the median value for the sale price per square foot. • If the Board accepts these changes the building value would decrease$7,500 to $617,700 and total property value would decrease from $935,200 to$927,700. • Photo of Subject • GIS Map • Analysis report • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $855,300 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner David Kaminski Appellant(if different) Property Address 111 High Street Parcel ID or Abstract 9778486372 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on a Redfin estimate. Current Assessed Value $430,600 County Opinion $430,600 Time of Hearin 3:41PM Appellant Opinion $354,736 County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision $430,600 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • This is a simple house,2 bedroom, 1 bath, in mediocre condition,that was purchased in 2010 for$150,000. We are pleased that it has gone up in value,but do not believe the fair market value or tax value is $430,600. Checking references and considering condition, we believe the Redfin estimate of$354,736 as being more realistic. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • On November 7,the subject property located at 111 High Street in Carrboro was visited by an appraiser. • A sales analysis was prepared for neighborhood 7203, showing multiple sales within the revaluation date range for comparison. Without knowing which comparables Redfin used to generate their estimate, I would say the most comparable property referenced in the sales analysis report is 807 W. Main Street,which sold for$517,000 on August 3,2023. • Based on this analysis, the County recommends no value change to the current assessed value. Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E • NBH 7203 Sales Analysis • Comparable Report • Photos of Subject • GIS Map • Current Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $430,600 No Change in Value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Paulo Ferreira Appellant(if different) Property Address 204 Hogan Woods Circle Parcel ID or Abstract 9870206372 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on comparable sales and the location of power lines and a cell tower. Current Assessed Value $924,800 ounty Opinion $924,800 Time of Hearin 3:47PM Appellant Opinion $798,491 County Representative Heidi Whetzel Board Decision $924,800 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • Appealing value based on comps, recent sales and powerline/cell reception tower. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is located at 204 Hogan Woods Circle in Chapel Hill. A site inspection was conducted on October 30,2025,by Tanner Valuation Group. The dwelling was observed to be in average condition at the time of inspection. Recent sales within the neighborhood exhibit similar characteristics, size, and construction quality,yet reflect values exceeding the subject's current assessment. A power line and cell transmission tower are located behind the dwelling and partially obscured by trees; however,both are situated on the opposite side of the property line. After review, no change in value is recommended. • Photo of Subject • Current Property Record Card • Sales Analysis • GIS Map Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $924,800 No Change in Value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E Voted Against ... Property Identification: Property Owner Elizabeth C. Dalehite tAellant(if different) Property Address 5501Oak Grove Churchcel ID or Abstract 9831395073 Road Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value to the current assessed value. Current Assessed Value $532,200 ounty Opinion $532,200 Time of Hearin 3:52PM Appellant Opinion $380,000 County Representative Roger Gunn Board Decision $532,200 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • In the appellant's appeal that she submitted online, she stated that the estimated value of her property was $380,000 and made the statement, "I cannot afford the taxes on the above appraisal." • No evidence to support her opinion of value or to refute the current assessed value was submitted. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • As no evidence was submitted to support the appellant's contention that the County's assessed value is incorrect, the County is recommending no change to the current valuation. • Location Map of Subject • Current Property Record Card Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $532,200 No Change in Value Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner I Polly T. Mebane Appellant(if different) Property Address 1812 Frazier Road Parcel ID or Abstract 19835631421 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the condition of the home. Current Assessed Value $248,600 ounty Opinion $248,600 Time of Hearin 4:OOPM Appellant Opinion $139,000 County Representative Roger Gunn Board Decision $230,300 Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E Evidence submitted by the appellant: • The appellant states that the home needs repairs which will be very expensive, and she just really wants to know the meaning behind reevaluations as she has heard so many different reasons. • The appellant furnished six photos as evidence of repairs needed to the property. • In addition to a prepared statement read by the appellant, Horace Johnson Jr.. and Julia Sendor of The Orange County Property Tax Justice Coalition also spoke on behalf of the appellant. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject is a manufactured home on 2.56 acres constructed in 1999 and containing 1,960 square feet. • At the informal appeal,the value was reduced from$267,300 to $248,600 with the subject having an effective year built the same as its actual year built and being listed in Fair condition with additional 10%physical depreciation applied for total depreciation of 46.9%. • Statements made by the appellant in the informal appeal were: ➢ "My modular home was built in 1999. 1 have lived in this home over 25 years and wish to continue ownership of the property. I understand increase in property values; however, I believe our home has been unfairly appraised. ➢ Condition: Our well needs maintenance due to age/condition. Flooring in kitchen and dining room were replaced(linoleum)however, all other flooring is original. Flooring is sagging and squeaking in some rooms. All windows(10) are original to the construction and in need of replacing. There is leaking pipes in bathroom. Ceiling in one of the bedrooms is sagging. The storage shed has damage throughout with holes in ceiling and flooring. ➢ I estimate the value of my property at: $242,300 ($138,700 for land and 103,600 for home after$25,000 estimate of necessary repair/renovation costs)." • The County is of the opinion that the impact of the condition on the property's value was adequately addressed at the informal appeal and no further adjustment to value is necessary. • Location Map of Subject • Current Property Record Card Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $230,300 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Gronks Doghouse LLC Appellant(if different) Property Address 705 Coker Lane Parcel ID or Abstract 19788703688 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the value of comparable properties. Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E Current Assessed Value $1,194,500 County Opinion $1,154,500 Time of Hearin 4:40PM Appellant Opinion $954,120 County Representative Heidi Whetzel Board Decision $1,154,500 Evidence submitted by the appellant: • 4 comparable properties all have lower per square foot values. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • The subject property is located at 705 Coker Lane in Chapel Hill. A site visit was conducted on October 23, 2025, and a hang tag was left to notify the appellant of the visit. After completing a sales analysis, it was found that comparable sales in the area are limited. Many of the surrounding properties are smaller in size and older than the subject dwelling. The comparable sales submitted by the appellant are approximately 50 years older and notably smaller. The comparable sales utilized in the County's analysis are closer in age to the subject property; however, those properties are of higher construction grade. Additionally, a review of aerial imagery in GIS indicates a stream running along the rear portion of the parcel. • After review, the County recommends the following change: • Applying a-10%adjustment for topography. • This adjustment will result in a revised value from$1,194,500 to$1,154,500. • Photos of Subject • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card • Sales Analysis • Comp photos listed in the analysis • GIS Map Motion of the Board Accept Count 's Proposed Value: $1,154,500 Made the motion Richal Vanhook Seconded the motion Saru Salvi Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Property Identification: Property Owner Shayna Hill Appellant(if different) Donald Burke Property Address 410 Brookside Drive Parcel ID or Abstract 9788240329 Statement of Appeal: Request a reduction in value based on the age and condition of the home. Current Assessed Value $936,900 ounty Opinion $830,600 Time of Hearin 4:53PM Appellant Opinion $675,000 County Representative Dana Hall Board Decision $780,600 Evidence submitted by the appellant: Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E • The houses that were used in my evaluation were compared to homes that were completely renovated. My home was built in in the 1950's.We have not done any major upgrades to our home. We basically replace things as they wear out. I'm on a fixed income on disability and my wife works at UNC. The only thing major was a pool 5 years ago. The tax accessor raised my value by$70,000. My understanding is that a pool puts property in a different category. Not everyone wants a pool due to insurance cost and maintenance cost. I understand that taxes go up. But to go up over$250,000 is a stretch. This property has been in our family since the 1970's. We don't plan on selling our house due to our age and the fact we have owned this property for so long. My wife and I have lived in this house for over 20 years. Before that my mother in law Virginia Hill purchased it. I personally know that the house at 306 Ransom St. was used in my evaluation. The owner was an older woman whom I used to help carry in her groceries as I walked by whom had passed away. The home was gutted and basically made into a new home. We also have a lot of students renting in our area. This becomes problem with the noise when students are in class. Game day celebrations and parties are constant. 75%of the homes in this neighborhood are rentals for students. There are very few home owners in and around our area. Evidence submitted by the county representative: • On November 7,2025,the subject property was inspected by Tanner Valuation Group. Based on the observed condition of the property, it is recommended that the Effective Year Built be adjusted to 1982 and that the condition be revised from Average to Fair. • The dwelling is in need of a new roof and gutters. There appears to be a crack in the seal near the fireplace stack. While there is market evidence supporting the current assessed value,the comparable properties used appear to have undergone significant upgrades and renovations that the subject property has not received. • Additionally,the pool, currently listed under the Yard Items,appears to be of C+10 grade quality rather than the previously assessed A+70 grade quality. • Recommended Adjustments: Change Effective Year Built to 1982 Change Condition to Fair Change Pool Grade to C+10 • After these changes, the new recommended value for the property is $830,600. • 7162 Sales Analysis • Comparable Report • Current Property Record Card • Proposed Property Record Card • Photos of Subject • GIS Map Motion of the Board Value Changed as Follows: $780,600 Made the motion Saru Salvi Seconded the motion Richal Vanhook Voted For All BOER Members Voted Against Docusign Envelope ID:9059FA55-A276-4268-BB65-EOBFOD9AD45E Chair of the Boar D(cuSigned by: Leon Meyers 1-'6D4FE-, 11/18/2025 Recording Secre �ocuSigned by: Jennifer Rigsbee 11/18/2025