Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12-09-2025-Business Meeting 1 APPROVED 1120/26 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BUSINESS MEETING December 9, 2025 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Tuesday, December 9, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jean Hamilton, Vice-Chair Amy Fowler, and Commissioners Jamezetta Bedford, Marilyn Carter, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie- Ascott COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below). Chair Hamilton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present. 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to add the approval of a Resolution Supporting JCPC Legislative Requests for Increased Funding as item 8-h, and to add item 11-a to discuss appointments to the Orange County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council. Commissioner Bedford pointed out that there is also a need to add a closed session to consult with the county attorney. Commissioner McKee amended his motion to include all three additions. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Chair Hamilton read the public charge. She reviewed the instructions for making public comment. 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour) a. Matters not on the Printed Aqenda Bill Madden said he used to referee adult soccer in Chapel Hill and recalled that Mark Marcopolos played in the league. He said former Commissioner Marcopolos cared about his teammates and everyone on the field. He said he helped canvas for Mark Marcopolos when he ran for the Board of County Commissioners, and he will be missed. He also thanked Commissioner Greene for her time on the Chapel Hill Town Council, recalling her past role in questioning developers about affordable housing, and appreciated her public service and public transit use. He added his wishes that she'd stay for another year on the Board. b. Matters on the Printed Agenda (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.) 2 3. Announcements, Petitions, and Comments by Board Members Commissioner Portie-Ascott began by sharing an urgent email received from Kevin Leonard, Executive Director of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC), about a new NC House Special Committee to examine property taxes. She read from the email, which expressed both optimism about having the opportunity to share perspectives but also realism about national trends. Leonard noted that states like Florida and California were seeking to "limit cap or even eliminate property taxes," and these trends "may influence policy conversations here in North Carolina." The first committee meeting was scheduled for December 17th in Raleigh. Leonard's call to action urged commissioners to begin conversations with their NC House and Senate members about how changes to the property tax system could affect service delivery and budgets. Commissioner Portie-Ascott also reported on the district directors' meeting, announcing that the first District 9 meeting would be held jointly with Districts 10, 11, 12, and 18 on March 6th from 10 AM to 2 PM in either Randolph or Guilford County. She thanked the county manager for agreeing to assist with advertising. She concluded by describing a Northern Orange First Saturday Speakers Forum she and Commissioner Carter had participated in, hosted by Representative Renee Price, focused on the housing crisis. They discussed the Longtime Homeowners Assistance program, rental assistance, and eviction diversion work. Community questions included: What are measurable affordable housing goals, and how is progress reported? How are developers held accountable for affordable housing commitments? How can equitable access be ensured for low-wealth households, immigrant families, and local workers? Will rental assistance and eviction prevention resources be expanded? The community also raised concerns about septic system failures that can "financially devastate a household with almost no support for middle-income families facing a $60,000 replacement cost." Commissioner McKee said Commissioner Portie-Ascott's comments about the state property tax committee directly align with his petition from last week. He said he will be at the meeting on the 17th to listen and hopefully have a hand in finding an adjustment. He also shared that he attended the memorial service for former Commissioner Mark Marcopolos along with close to 200 others. Vice-Chair Fowler shared that the Tax Assessment Work Group had met twice since the last Board meeting - on December 2nd for educational sessions and December 5th to review the RFP for a consultant. The consultant would review tax policies and procedures and make recommendations on ways to improve equity in the revaluation process and improve community education and communication regarding tax reevaluations and the appeals process. The RFP will go out later in the month with a 30-day response time, and the review process is expected to take approximately three months. The next work group meeting is scheduled virtually on January 12th at 2:00 PM to learn from County staff attorney Martha Bordogna about the Board of Equalization and Review. Hudson Vaughan will also share his community presentation to bring all work group members up to speed on community concerns. Commissioner Fowler announced that she and Commissioner Carter will join Hudson Vaughan and Shereese Alston on WCHL this week to discuss tax revaluation and equity concerns, with the show airing later. She wished everyone happy holidays and acknowledged Commissioner Bedford for her leadership as Chair over the past 3 years and her ongoing mentorship and presented her with a gift from the Board. Commissioner Bedford thanked Orange County staff for their work and dedication to serving the public. She highlighted some challenges staff faced over the year including Tropical Storm Chantal and the federal SNAP benefit issues. Commissioner Bedford reminded the public that taxes are due around January 3rd or 5th, when interest collection would begin. She encouraged residents to call the tax office to set up a payment plan as soon as they can. She 3 wished everyone happy holidays and said she is looking forward to working with the Board in 2026. Commissioner Carter echoed thanks to Commissioner Bedford and expanded on Commissioner Fowler's Tax Assessment Work Group update. She emphasized that the group had held four meetings in the last six weeks, with great work underway to get an RFP out for a consultant who would provide recommendations in the first quarter of the new year. Commissioner Carter highlighted a presentation from Wake County's tax assessor, who had been recognized by advocates and other assessors around the state for some innovative approaches. Wake County's changes included technology updates, bringing staff in-house, transitioning commercial appraisals in-house, moving to a two-year reappraisal cycle, and approaching everything with a customer service mindset. They were integrating operations with CRM software and their call center platform and notably were taking advantage of the local relationship with SAS, also based out of Wake County, to implement machine learning in their processes. She said she is excited to address the very valid concerns expressed by residents this year and shared that, in visiting a Chapel Hill neighborhood with a resident, those experiencing "valuation and tax sticker shock" appreciated that the Board was taking action. She noted that the WCHL interview would be on Thursday between 3:00 and 6:00 PM, and wished everyone happy, healthy, and safe holidays. Commissioner Greene wished happy holidays to everyone present and to the county's hardworking staff. She reported that the previous weekend's Abolition Day events went well, with one more event scheduled for tomorrow evening at 5:00 PM at the Seymour Center- a screening of Ava DuVernay's documentary The 13th about the prison industrial system and how it exploits a loophole in the 13th Amendment. The screening will be followed by a panel discussion including County Deputy Manager Cait Fenhagen. Chair Hamilton reported on the Alliance Health Board meeting she attended and said a letter was being sent to the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services about concerns regarding Alliance Health's ability to continue meeting behavioral health needs due to being "financially squeezed." She promised to share the letter with the Board. Chair Hamilton highlighted an information item on the agenda about the Human Services Work Group, commending Deputy Manager Cait Fenhagen for her work. She emphasized it is vital that in this environment, where there is less funding and rising human services needs, to figure out how we can do it better and ensure more coordination between departments. She mentioned she would email information about cold-weather cots, which had been activated due to the recent cold temperatures, thanking all staff working to protect residents. She also thanked the community for their donations to the toy drive. She thanked everyone and wished them happy and safe holidays, noting this was the Board's last business meeting of the year. 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations None. 5. Public Hearings a. Public Hearing Regarding a Proposed Economic Development Recruitment Incentive and Performance Agreement Between Orange County and CITEL America, Inc. (Project Rooster The Board received the proposal to consider entering a Performance Agreement for the purpose of incentivizing CITEL's investment in Orange County; conducted the Public Hearing and receive public comments, and approved the performance-based incentive agreement between Orange County and CITEL America, Inc., subject to final review by the County Attorney, authorized the Chair to sign the Performance Agreement on behalf of the County, and authorized the County 4 Manager to sign any contract amendments up to the maximum performance incentive amount of $100,433. BACKGROUND: Local and state governments in North Carolina have the goal to promote economic development by encouraging the location of new businesses and the expansion of existing businesses. This activity serves to diversify the local tax base, increase employment opportunities, and introduce desired job skills and related benefits to a community, and for the benefit of its residents. The Local Government Act, North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 158- 7.1, outlines the requirements of public hearings, and NCGS 158-7.1(a) specifically addresses the requirement that economic development appropriations "must be determined by the governing body of the city or county to increase the population, taxable property, agriculture industries, employment, industrial output, or business prospects of the city or county". This public hearing has been scheduled in compliance. Company Background: CITEL America, Inc. is a privately owned French manufacturer of electrical Surge Protection Devices (SPDs)that protect electronic and electric equipment from transient overvoltages caused by lightning strikes, switching events, and electromagnetic interferences. The company was formed in Paris, France in 1937 and expanded to the United States in 1985. CITEL has eight (8) international offices and research and development sites, as well as a large network of international distributors and partners providing support directly in the communities they are serving. Germany Bochum t $� France . �►. Faris 6 Raims 70 1 USA '' China Bog Miami + ° Shanghai g ot a om NAE ew e i , Uahai CITEL is the only SPD manufacturer that produces its own Gas Discharge Tubes (GDTs). In addition to GDTs, the company develops many of its critical surge components internally including thermally protected varistors and high-energy varistor assemblies, giving the company extensive knowledge of every minute detail of the parts that form an SPD. These components have a long 5 history of reliable performance and thanks to many patents, CITEL products are accepted as the industry standard by many leading international companies. --------------- 1 1 1937 Il .fll -------------- CITEL founded ,r 1944 cr�� ra Manufacture of the -------------- A first surge arrester " 1985 CITEL USA ------------ r�, 1988 d 1988 1st AC modular CITEL Germany surge protector ............. 1992 _ Reims factory -------------- 1 996 i CITEL Shanghai 1997 -AC surge protector new range<(DS»series -VG technology for AC surge protector 2012 2012 Implementation of CITEL India a test laboratory in Reims 20 1 0 = 2017 New test laboratory 240 kA CITEL Thailand in CITEL Shanghai F - 2019 AC I OC new range C 2021 CITEL Middle East 2023 0 PV new range with CTC Technology ® � 2024 CITEL Colombia 6 Project Description: The Board is requested to consider an inducement incentive for the international industrial prospect CITEL, a French-owned manufacturer and research & development firm for electrical surge protection devices. This project involves the relocation of the company's United States operation from Florida to Orange County. • CITEL desires to relocate the current United States office and manufacturing footprint out of Florida. This is driven by an increase in extreme weather events in Florida, and the associated increase in costs. Proximity to the RDU Airport is also preferred, driven by direct flights to Paris. • An Orange County site would house both office and manufacturing operations and serve as the new United States headquarters for the company. • Project encompasses $15,250,000 million in total capital investment (forecast to occur in 2026 - 2030). • 79 total jobs, with 38 new jobs to be created between 2025 — 2029 at an average annual wage of $83,611 or approximately $40.20 per hour. It should be noted that 41 positions currently based at the Florida location would be offered a transfer position to North Carolina. The total number of employees to migrate and accept this offer is yet to be determined. • Competing sites are in Florida, South Carolina, Washington, and Texas. CITEL has considered locations across the southeast that provide strong logistics, access to workforce, high quality of life for employees, direct access to Paris and reasonable real estate costs. Driving factors include overall operating costs and quality of life. • Orange County's site is the former 80,596 square foot "Mid-Atlantic STIHL, Inc." building located at 315 Executive Ct., Hillsborough, NC in the Meadowlands Business Park. •i• 7 CY r i OKA • f. -- `0 • Mid•Allanli iStihl Inc Basis to Calculate the Value of Orange County Performance-Based Incentives 1) INVESTMENT — The Orange County incentive is based only on the $6,000,000 personal property investment, and on the estimated $500,000 to $1,000,000 in net new real property investment for upfit improvements to be made to the existing building. Real Property: Up to$9.25 million for an existing building, which includes CITEL making up to $1,000,000 in new building upfit improvements. The value of the existing building is not included in the County's incentive calculation. Personal Property: $6,000,000 in new taxable machinery and equipment investment. Total Real $9,250,000 $0 F $0 -UW0 $0 $9,250,000 Property-,- $2,000,000 $6,000,000 - $1000,00 $1,000,00 $1,000,00 $1,000,00 Property0 0 0 0 $11,250,00 $1,000,00 $1,000,00 $1,000,00 $1,000,00 $15,250,00 0 0 0 0 0 0 2) EMPLOYMENT — CITEL will add net new employment consistent with the job growth chart below. If annual job targets are not achieved, the annual incentive payment will be reduced by $500 per full time equivalent employee not hired. By year 2029, the company will create 79 new positions with an average salary of$83,611 per year. 2025 2026 2027i iTotal New Full- . . 8 The proposed inducement payment will be in the form of a performance-based grant payable in up to five (5) installments over a five-year period at an amount equal to 75% of CITEL' s projected net increase in real and personal property tax valuation over the five-year investment period as outlined in the chart above for 2026—2030. It ensures that annual tax revenues from the project's additional investment, net of annual incentive payments, remain positive in all years of the incentive agreement. New �— Property $17,553 $22,660 $27,255 $31,392 $35,050 Tax Revenue Incentive -$13,165 -$16,995 -$20,442 -$23,544 -$26,288 Payment Annual Net $4,388 $5,665 $6,814 $7,848 $8,763 Revenue • • - $263,313 Incentive Payment -$100,433 Total Net Revenue ___111r $162,880 Additional Partner Participation (1) The State of North Carolina has offered CITEL the following incentive programs to encourage the company to locate the manufacturing facility in Orange County, instead of choosing competing locations in other states, and, subject to approval of local County government incentives. State of North Carolina— Incentives 00 State Tax Exemption on Machinery & Equipment Purchases $270,000 One North Carolina Fund $50,000 N.C. Community College System's Customized Training $118,500 Value Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) $52,800 Federal Bonding Program $90,000 Job Ready Grants $10,000 (2) Capital Area Workforce Development (CAWD) has offered: - Employment Recruitment and Screening Services - Partnership with local agencies and institutions of higher learning - On-The-Job Training reimbursement - Incumbent Worker Training grant ($10,000) 9 Steve Brantley, Economic Development Director, introduced Henri Guichard (President of CITEL Group), Patrick Coyle (Vice President of CITEL America from Florida), Daniel Cardoza (Regional Sales Manager), Tatiana Diep (Production Manager), and Abby Currants from the Economic Development Partnership of North Carolina, who reports to the governor's office and had brought CITEL to look at Orange County. Steve Brantley made the following presentation: Slide #1 i ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Proposed Financial Recruitment Incentive for the Industry CITEL America, Inc. Public Hearing by Orange County Board of Commissioners Southern Human Services Center-Chapel Hill,NC December 9, 2025 Slide #2 About CITEL • Founded in 1937, CITEL is a private,family-owned French manufacturer of industrial surge protection products with a wide global footprint. • CITEL is headquartered in Paris, France.The USA operation was established 1985, and the current U.S.footprint is in Miramar FL. • CITEL's products offer protection for many installation types including AC and DC power supply,telecommunication, radio,data centers,wind turbines and more. • CITEL is the leading manufacturer that exclusively produces both Surge Protective Devices (SPDs)and Surge Protective Components(SPCs). • CITEL has 8 international offices and R&D sites throughout the world. ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 10 Slide #3 CITEL Global Operations Germany a!_ Franca 7k.� ArtralPMar a l Aas Chi+ IlkColumbia I]AE IN- India / hVile r Thailand ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Slide #4 Location of Proposed Site 315 Executive Ct„ Hillsborough, Orange County (former location of"Mid-Atlantic STIHL Inc") ��• rn�e�noanu�mnh ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 11 Slide #5 Existing Building Former location of"Mid-Atlantic STIHL Inc" ORANGE COUNTY s NORTH CAROLINA Slide #6 Project Description • French-owned manufacturer and research &development company for electrical surge protection devices • 79 total jobs, with 38 new jobs created between 2025—2029 • Average annual wage of$83,611 or approximately$40.20 per hour • $15,250,000 million in total capital investment(forecast to occur in 2026- 2030) • Competing sites are in Florida, South Carolina, Washington,Texas and various communities in Durham and Wake County. • North Carolina Governor Josh Stein met in Paris with the CITEL owners in June 2025 during the State's European business recruiting mission. ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Steve Brantley noted that the average pay is well above the Orange County living wage. 12 Slide#7 Forecast of CITEL's New Job Creation Hiring schedule for 79 full-time jobs,with health care, retirement and related employee benefits $83,611 annual salary, or, $40.20 per hour 7 3 43 11 11 11 79 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Slide #8 Outline of State & Local Incentives State of North Carolina Sales Tax Exemption on Machinery&Equipment Purchases $270,000 One North Carolina Fund(discretionary performance grant) $50,000 N.C.Community College System's"Customized Training" $118,500 Job Ready Grants $10,000 Work Opportunity Tax Credit $52,800 Federal Bonding Program $90,000 Orange Performance Based Incentive(as proposed) $100,433 Total $691,733 ORANGE COUNTY 9 NORTH CAROLINA 13 Slide #9 Forecast of CITEL's Capital Investment Schedule 20220296 2027 Fi Total $9,250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,250,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $11,250,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $15,250,000 The Orange County incentive is based only on the $6,000,000.00 personal property investment, and on the estimated $500,000.00 to $1,000,000.00 in net new real property investment for upfit improvements to be made to the existing building. Real Property: Up to$9.25 million for an existing building,which includes CITEL making up to$1,000,000 in new building upfit improvements. The value of the existing building is not included in the County's incentive calculation. ` Personal Prope : O NORTHCOUNTY rty $6,000,000.00 in new taxable machinery and equipment investment. Slide #10 Orange County's Performance-Based Incentive • Performance-based grant is calculated at 75%of actual net-new business and real property tax investment valuation,for 5 years. (Same incentive formula as previously approved by the BOCC for ABB, Medline Industries, and Morinaga). • The purchase of the former Mid-Atlantic STIHL Inc. building that is already taxed by Orange County, is not included in the calculation.Only the net-new investment in personal property(machinery&equipment), and$500,000 to $1,000,000 in additional real property(for improvements to the existing building to be purchased)is proposed to receive an incentive. • Estimated 5-year incentive total is$100,433 • During the first 10 years of operation,CITEL's investment is estimated to create up to$263,313 in total gross property tax valuation,and $162,800 in net valuation for the County. ORANGE COUNTY 10 NORTH CAROLINA 14 Slide #11 Orange County's Performance-Based Incentive Orange PropertyNew Tax $17,553 $22,660 $27,255 $31,392 $35,050 $133,910 Revenue Incentive Paymenti -$13,165 -$16,995 -$20,442 -$23,544 -$26,288 -$100,433 $4,388 $5,665 $6,814 $7,848 $8,763 $33,477 Orange PropertyNew $263,313 Incentive Payments $100,433 Total $162,880 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Steve Brantley emphasized that the incentive would be revenue positive for Orange County in all years. Slide #12 Benefits of CITEL Locating in Orange County • Creates 79 total full-time jobs,with benefits,to include 38 new full-time Jobs to be created locally(in addition to the 41 jobs that will be offered relocation from Florida)to be created between 2025—2029,at an average annual wage of$83,611 or approximately $40.20 per hour. • Adds up to$6 million in new personal property investment(machinery and equipment)and$500,000 to$1,000,000 in new real property investment(building upfit improvements),to include the potential for solar panels. • Occupies a commerciallindustrial building that is currently vacant in Hillsborough's Meadowlands business district. • Proposed incentive is revenue positive for the first 5 years,netting 25% per year of the forecasted net new property tax valuation. • Increased diversification of the County's economy through adding another light industrial manufacturer,and with international ties. • Orange County would become the firm's chief center of operations in the USA. �1 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 15 Slide #13 Proposal for Orange County's Financial Incentives for CITEL America, Inc. Questions & Discussion ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Fowler, to open the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS PUBLIC COMMENTS None. A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Bedford asked about the sales tax implications for the sale of surge protectors. Patrick Coyle explained that sales tax would depend on the end user- if sold to an in-state end user there would be sales tax, but sales to resellers wouldn't collect sales tax until the final sale. Commissioner Carter spoke in favor of this proposed incentive agreement and what the company brings to Orange County. She said this is aligned with the County's strategic goals. Commissioner McKee said he is delighted to have this in front of the Board tonight. He said he's familiar with the building and was aware it had been vacant for a year. He complimented real estate agent Emilee Collins on finding this opportunity. He said the proposal is net positive from the get-go. A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Fowler, to approve the performance-based incentive agreement between Orange County and CITEL America, Inc., subject to final review by the County Attorney, authorize the Chair to sign the Performance 16 Agreement on behalf of the County, and authorize the County Manager to sign any contract amendments up to the maximum performance incentive amount of$100,433. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Chair Hamilton said the Board is pleased to support this incentive and thanked CITEL for their interest in Orange County. 6. Regular Agenda a. Longtime Homeowner Assistance (LHA) Program — Potential Addition of Funds The Board received an update on application numbers and percent tax relief for the calendar year 2025 Longtime Homeowner Assistance (LHA) program, which assists low-income Orange County homeowners with a discount or rebate on their property tax bill; and considered a potential increase in funding for the current year LHA program. BACKGROUND: The LHA Program was initiated in 2022 to assist longtime Orange County residents with assistance for potentially burdensome property tax bills. Since then, the program has expanded with annual contributions from both Chapel Hill and, newly this year, Carrboro. In 2025, the Orange County property tax revaluation raised property values significantly for many Orange County residents, and the anticipated increase in LHA applications and approvals has manifested, with nearly 60% more applications submitted than 2024, and approximately 70% more approvals. In the table below, the "eligible" row is still an estimate, as staff have yet to complete final processing of all applications: LHA Applications Submitted 2024 2025 Number Percentage Number Percentage Eligible Applications 502 83% 850* 90% Ineligible Applications 102 17% 92 10% TOTAL 604 942 Staff has calculated award amounts using the following guidelines (parameters below are from 2024 and using 2024 amounts, these steps would remain the same for 2025 although the values would change): • All applicants were arranged in priority order o FIRST: Tax Burden, largest to smallest o SECOND: Length in Home, longest to shortest o THIRD: Age, oldest to youngest • Full awards were allocated to as many participants as possible using $75,000 of the $250,000 available funding. 17 • Staff determined a multiplying factor for the remaining $175,000 in available funding and used this to reduce all other awards by the same percentage. • All eligible homeowners received a minimum award amount of $200 or up to the full amount of the County portion of their tax bill if it was less than $200. • Award amounts were the County portion of the tax bill less 2% of the applicant's household income. Staff currently estimates that there will be 850 approved LHA applications, with a total County property tax burden of $1,894,000. The exact property tax burden is difficult to calculate, as the Tax Office continues to process data for a significant number of residents. Last year, with $250,000 allocated, LHA covered 25% of the County property tax burden for qualified applicants. Given the current County budget allocation is $377,805, staff estimates the allocation will cover about 19.9% of County property tax burden for the estimated recipients. The County has two potential options in order to close the gap between 2024 and 2025 cost shares: • Option 1: Using the remaining funds in the Social Justice account(approximately$76,000) would increase the cost share to 24%. • Option 2: In order to achieve the same cost share proportion as last year (25%), the County would need to allocate an estimated $95,726. Staff plans to share a more definite amount at the meeting. The difference between the Social Justice account and this figure would require a transfer from the County Capital Reserve Fund. The County Capital Reserve was seeded in FY 2023 with $2,500,000 in surplus sales tax and has been used over four fiscal years to address unanticipated capital and non-recurring needs. A transfer of that difference ($19,726) would result in a remaining balance in the County Capital Reserve Fund of$21,470. It should be noted that while staff is estimating both the total number of qualified applicants and the exact County property tax burden at the time of this agenda abstract publication, the final figures will be available and shared by the meeting date. It is also relevant to note that using the remainder of the Social Justice fund in January would leave the County without an unallocated reserve to meet emergencies through the end of the 2025-26 fiscal year. Blake Rosser, Housing Director, introduced the item. He reported a large increase in applications due to the revaluation -from just over 600 total applications last year to 940 this year. Approvals increased from around 500 last year to approximately 800 this year (expecting about 850), representing about a 60% increase. He said the Board had already authorized increased funding, but he wanted to compare the percentage of relief provided. Last year, $250,000 covered about 25% of the county property tax burden for recipients. This year's $377,000 allocation would cover about 20% of the burden for the estimated number of recipients. To approximate last year's 25% level would require using the remaining $76,000 from the Social Justice Fund account, bringing coverage to about 24%, with an additional $20,000 needed from elsewhere to fully reach 25%. Blake Rosser noted that using the remainder of the Social Justice Fund would leave no unallocated reserve for emergencies for the remainder of the fiscal year. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what the risk is if there are no reserves in the Social Justice Fund. 18 Travis Myren explained that the undesignated fund balance is always available for emergencies, and following the January audit presentation, additional funds above the 16% fund balance may be available. Commissioner McKee said $50,000 could be taken from the Social Justice Fund, and the remainder could be picked up by the fund balance. He said he would like to leave something in the Social Justice Fund. Vice-Chair Fowler said if there is a true emergency in the future, staff can still take money from the fund balance. She asked about the county capital reserve. Travis Myren said the reserve was created a couple years ago, and can be used for operating or capital purposes. Vice-Chair Fowler asked if the other option is the undesignated fund balance. Travis Myren said yes. Commissioner Bedford argued for using the full $76,000 from social justice for easier accounting. She noted the capital reserve had $41,196 currently but expected additional monies after the audit, possibly almost a million dollars. She wanted to make a motion to reach 25% using whatever combination the manager deemed best, acknowledging it could be slightly higher since final approval numbers weren't known. She suggested funds might initially come from the fund balance with a budget amendment after the audit. Commissioner Carter supported increasing the program while questioning whether 25% was the right objective. She asked if they'd always had that goal and what was magical about 25%. Travis Myren said that is just what was done last year. Commissioner Carter suggested this broader question about what the goal should be might be appropriate for budget discussions. She also asked about distribution across municipalities, particularly since Chapel Hill and Carrboro had contributed funds. Blake Rosser said he is planning to come back in February with that sort of information. He said Chapel Hill pitched in more than anticipated this year (almost $87,000) and Carrboro joined in for the first time. Chair Hamilton asked if the Towns' monies are going straight to their residents. Blake Rosser said it is applied to the Town portion of the bill for their residents. Commissioner Greene said she supports reaching 25% by any combination of funds staff chooses. Vice-Chair Fowler responded to Commissioner Carter's question about goals, explaining the program started 4-5 years ago with the 2021 revaluation also catching people off guard. The original idea was to offset that increase rather than pay the whole bill. Chair Hamilton added that it started with just a dollar amount that the Housing Department had to spread across all needs and evolved over time. She agreed with Commissioner Carter's point about discussing this in the full budget context. A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, to reach the 25% allocation like last year and to defer to staff to bring a formal proposal as to how that allocation will occur. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. One-Year Pilot Implementation of Fare-Free Fixed Route Transportation Service The Board approved fee changes to implement a one-year pilot program, making Orange County Public Transportation (OCPT) fixed routes fare-free. 19 BACKGROUND: Orange County Public Transportation (OCPT) operates fixed-route transit services that connect thousands of residents to key destinations in the community each year. Currently, riders who do not qualify for a reduced or fare-free program pay a nominal fare to use the service. The Transportation Services Department proposes a one-year pilot project implementing a fare-free fixed-route model effective January 2, 2026 to assess the benefits to public transit efficiency and accessibility countywide. National and regional transit data show that fare-free systems result in increased ridership, attracting new passengers while enabling existing riders to travel more frequently. Agencies that have implemented fare-free fixed routes have reported ridership growth of up to 30%, particularly among low-income residents who are the most sensitive to cost barriers. By removing fares as a one-year pilot program, OCPT can assess the financial obstacles to mobility and potential benefits related to access to employment, education, medical care, and essential services across Orange County. In addition to potentially expanding public access, a one-year pilot of fare-free fixed routes offers significant operational benefits. • Eliminating fare transactions streamlines the boarding process, improving stop efficiency and reducing delays that impact schedule reliability. • Removes the need for staff to verify eligibility for reduced or fare-free programs on fixed routes, allowing transit personnel to focus solely on safety and service delivery. • OCPT would eliminate the costs for one year associated with purchasing, maintaining, and servicing fare collection equipment, reducing long-term operational and capital expenses. The one-year pilot fare-free fixed-route system positions OCPT to assess service to the community, invest in service quality, and assess barriers to transportation. This initiative represents a possible strategic opportunity to increase ridership, enhance operational efficiency, and strengthen transit equity for all Orange County residents. Staff will assess the impacts over the one-year period, and present findings to the Board in November 2026 related to potential continuation or discontinuance of the fare-free fixed-route system. Sarah Williamson, Transportation Services Interim Director, made the following presentation: Slide #1 20 40 `r. Slide #2 / 04 Fare Free Fixed Route Service ► ��,, Orange and Blue Loops: currently free Hill-to-Hill and Orange Alamance: l Currently$1 for elderly or disabled `bhp Currently$2 for all other riders IVG 1O y t t Opel 21 Slide #3 I Save Time, Save Money •` Simplified Boarding No Need to Qualify Riders Eliminates Fee Collection Equipment Slide #4 Net Positive Impact • AnnualExpenses Operating Contract $11,160 $0 Contract ended 6/2025 n Service Fees $25,800 $0 .w �W Equipment $6,000 $0 Upgrade every 3-5 years Fares 1 -$10,000 $0 Total 1 $32,960 1 $0 Sarah Williamson explained that the pilot program would implement fare-free service effective January 2, 2026, benefiting users by making public transportation more accessible for medical appointments, employment, education, and other essential services. Based on programs studied around the country, they would save time and money through simplified boarding processes, eliminating the need to qualify riders for reduced fares, and removing fee collection 22 equipment. She said the simplified boarding would make routes run more quickly, benefiting passengers and drivers. She said the program would actually save about $32,000 annually. Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she is supportive of the fare-free option. She asked what times the fixed routes run, thinking about families who engage with the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council, who identified transportation as a barrier to accessing services. Sarah Williamson said the county runs fixed routes from 8:00 am-5:00 pm. She said on- demand routes cost between $3 and $5, and would be more relevant for those clients. Vice-Chair Fowler asked whether they'd still have cost savings during a pilot if the equipment remained Sarah Williamson explained the timing was particularly good because the operating contract ended in July and they'd been going month-to-month, plus the fee collection equipment was "at the end of life." If they were to continue collecting fees, they'd need new equipment regardless. The $30,000 cost shown was annualized over the equipment Iifecycle. Commissioner McKee asked which company fees are collected through. Sarah Williamson said UMO. Commissioner McKee said he would just assume put fare-free fixed routes it in place going forward instead of a one-year pilot program. Commissioner Carter asked if savings from this can be applied to Mobility on Demand rides, which could help with what Commissioner Portie-Ascott was mentioning. Sarah Williamson said they could look at it, but noted those services cost $70-90 per response while only charging $3-5. Commissioner Greene supported the proposal, recalling from her time on the Chapel Hill Town Council that the fare box was only a very small percentage of what it costs to operate a system. She wondered why more systems hadn't gone fare-free and said she would be prepared to vote to make it permanent. Chair Hamilton said it is important to have a pilot because we don't know what the impact will be on demand and how that will change the calculation of cost. She said she wants to be able to manage the expectations of residents. A motion was made by Commissioner Bedford, seconded by Commissioner Greene, to approve the fee changes and the implementation of a one-year pilot program for fare-free fixed- route transportation service effective January 2, 2026. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7. Reports a. Update on Revaluation Appeals and Neighborhood Reviews The Board approved fee changes to implement a one-year pilot program, making Orange County Public Transportation (OCPT) fixed routes fare-free. BACKGROUND: The Board of Commissioners received the second update on property tax appeals and neighborhood reviews at the October 21, 2025 Business meeting. This report provides a status update on the property tax appeals and neighborhood reviews that have been completed through November 26, 2025, the value adjustments resulting from those reviews, and the geographic distribution of both the informal and formal appeals. Appeal Status The Tax Office received a total of 3,346 informal appeals during the informal appeal window that was open from March 21 to April 30, 2025. Following the informal appeal window, the Tax Office received an additional 1,109 formal appeals for a total of 4,455 appeals. Of that total, 3,966 are 23 unique properties, with the overlap representing properties that were appealed at both informal and formal levels. Of the formal apeals, 77 were not submitted by the deadline and will not be considered. As of November 26, 2025, the Tax Office issued decisions on 100% of the informal appeals. The Board of Equalization and Review has completed 655 or 64% of the formal appeals with 367 in process. The remaining appeals are scheduled to be completed on or before January 22, 2025. The additional days added in January are to account for rescheduled appeals, continued appeals, and appeals from neighborhood reviews. The total change in assessed value from appeals is a decrease of$232,489,448 as of November 26, 2025. The median change for residential properties is a decrease of$38,000, and the median change for nonresidential properties is a decrease of$66,400. Neighborhood Reviews The Tax Office conducted an equity analysis on the County's 1,026 assessment neighborhoods. The International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) specifies that measures of vertical equity are only representative of possible inequities in neighborhoods that have a statistically significant amount of sales. Based on that, the Tax Office reviewed the neighborhoods with five (5) sales or more and identified 86 neighborhoods that were outside of the equity standards used by the IAAO. Of the neighborhoods with less than five (5) sales, the Tax Office examined those neighborhoods for consistency and reasonableness and identified an additional 76 neighborhoods that required a more thorough review. The Tax Office also studied the 19 neighborhoods identified by the Orange County Property Tax Justice Coalition for possible value adjustments. A total of 171 neighborhoods were identified by the Tax Office for closer review. If value adjustments are made as a result of the neighborhood reviews, property owners will receive notice of the change and will have fifteen (15) days to appeal that change to the Board of Equalization and Review. Tanner Valuation Group is assisting the Tax Office with the neighborhood level reviews. As of November 26, 2025, 152 neighborhood reviews or 89% have been completed. Those reviews resulted in value adjustments to 1,460 properties and a total assessed value decrease of $60,972,300. The remaining 19 neighborhoods will be completed by December 19, 2025. While conducting the neighborhood reviews, the Tanner Group observed some common issues warranting a decrease to the original assessed value. The most common reason that assessed values were reduced during the neighborhood review process was that the original assessed value was not discounted due to deferred maintenance. During the appraisal process, Orange County appraisers conducted roadside evaluations of approximately 10,000 of the approximately 58,000 properties in Orange County. The roadside review can result in a reduction in value due to deferred maintainance if it can be obseved on the exterior of the property, but appraisers do not inspect the interior of homes unless they are invited. As a result, properties that were not viewed by appraisers in a roadside evaluation and properties where maintenance was deferred on the interior would not have been accounted for in the original value assessment. A question about best practices for identifying, verifying, and accounting for deferred maintenance will be added to the Tax Assessment Work Group Request for Proposal for consulting services. Tanner Valuation Group also noted that some neighborhoods in Orange County, particularly near the University, include a variety of housing types. Mass appraisal generally assumes that properties in a neighborhood are like one another. However, some neighborhoods in Orange County have very diverse houising types where older, owner-occupied properties are situated 24 next to properties that have undergone extensive renovation or are income producing student rentals. The conservation neighborhoods in Chapel Hill such as Northside also have restrictions on how large a property can be if an older home were removed and a new home constructed. These restrictions limit the potential value, and, therefore, also limit the assessed value. On the statistical measures of vertical equity, the Tanner Group noted that the statistical analysis conducted by the Tax Office included the sales data dating back to 2021. If those sales are appraised using market conditions in 2024, the assessed value would likely be much higher than the sale price in 2021 given market pressure that raised prices since then. Tanner would recommend limiting the analysis to more recent sales data. The sales that occured in 2021-2022 also included several vacant land sales. By the time those properties were appraised, homes had been constructed on the vacant property, dramatically increasing the assessed value compared to the vacant land sale price. As a result, the sales ratio on those properties (assessed value divided by its sale price) would artificially elevate the price related differential (PRD) measure of vertical equity. Those sales would typically be considered outliers and removed from the sales data, but the Tax Office retained those sales in the measures of vertical equity to represent a conservative approach. Appeals and Neighborhood Review Dashboard and Reports In an effort to provide timely updates, the Tax Office has automated several reports to track the status of appeals and neighborhood reviews. The dashboard (Attachment 1) summarizes the total number of informal and formal reviews completed either by the Tax Office or the Board of Equalization and review. The dashboard also tracks the properties that had a change in value, the dollar value of the reduction, and the percentage values were reduced for the properties that had a change in value. The dashboard also shows the number of neighborhood reviews that have been completed, the number of properties where the value was changed, and the dollar value of those changes. The FY 2025-26 Budget assumes a tax base reduction of 3% or$936,162,977 resulting from the appeal process. Currently, the total decrease in the tax base is $293,461,748 or 0.94%. If the tax base is reduced by more than 3%, property tax collections may not meet the budgeted amount. The Tax Office also created three additional reports (Attachments 2, 3, and 4) that provide a more granular view of appeals and value changes by neighborhood for both appeals and neighborhood reviews. Attachment 4 details individual property value reductions resulting from appeals. Attachments 5 and 6 are maps showing the geographic location of the informal and formal appeals. Tax Bill Adjustments A change in value due to neighborhod review or an appeal will change the amount of property tax due. Taxpayers who have already paid their property taxes will be issued a refund if the amount is lower than their original tax bill. A notice of additional tax due is sent if the amount of the bill is higher than the original tax bill. The deadline to pay property tax bills to avoid interest penalties is January 5, 2026. Since some decisions on formal appeals will occur after this date, the Tax Office will be required to pay interest on refunds issued after the deadline. The amount of interest paid follows the amount of interest charged for delinquent payments: 2% for January, and 0.75% for every month thereafter per NC General Statute 105-360(e). 25 Travis Myren, County Manager, made the following presentation: Slide #1 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAR411-INA Update on 2025 Property Tax Appeals and Neighborhood Reviews Board of Commissioners Business Meeting December 9, 2025 Slide #2 Purpose 1 . Receive update on appeals of property value and neighborhood reviews following the revaluation 2. Detailed reports available in meeting materials • Appeals and Neighborhood Review Dashboard • Neighborhood Review Status • Appeals Per Neighborhood Res-Com • Individual Property Value Reduction By Neighborhood • Map of Informal Appeals Outcomes • Map of Formal Appeals Outcomes ORANGE COUNTY 2 NORTH CAROLINA 26 Slide #3 Dashboard Orange County 2025 Appeals Status Data as of: November 26,2025 Number of Appeals Value Total Appeals Completed In Process Untimely Values Updated A w/Value Change Total Appeal Value Reduction Pct Informal 3,348 3,348 - 3,372 2,145 $ 200,765,498 5.37% Formal 1,022 655 367 77 524 424 $ 31,723,950 0,85% Totals 4,370 4,003 367 77 3,896 2,569 $ 232,489,448 Neighborhoods Reviewed 152 Appeals Value Reduction $ 232,489,449 Properties w/Value Change 146o Neighborhood Revlew Value Reduction $ 60,972,300 Total Value Reduction $ 293,461,749 0.94% Estimated Value Reduction to Tax Base(3%) $ 936,162,977 3.00% s ORANGE �COUN�TY N4DAs of November 26th, the appeals dashboard showed both informal and formal appeals status. Tax Administration had completed 152 of 171 neighborhood reviews, with only seven remaining as of the meeting date. The total property tax base reduction so far was approximately $293 million, just less than 1% of the total tax base. Slide #4 orange c—y Ir«mat APpeas z025 Informal Appeals bye, Neighborhood 100% of informal appeals have been completed y , r•';y. � '�� . ' 64% or 2,145 of informal appeals resulted in a Ayes � ,r>r. ram` •� ,.�:. value change (primarily reductions);' i • $200.7 million reduction to tax base a _ L ` r . 4 ®. 27 Slide #5 Formal Appeals by °"°°'eCOO°ry­I1s2025 Neighborhood •� 65% of formal appeals have been completed - 367 formal appeals are pending • 65% or 424 of formal appeals resulted in a value r ' change (primarily reductions) • $31.7 million reduction to tax base • All formal appeals completed by mid-January 2026 Taxpayers with value reductions receive refund s `P with interest after January 5, 2026 - 16 _ 5 Slide #6 PropertyVa I u e Reductions Individual Property Value Reductions Sorted By Neighborhood Data as ef:November 26,2025 Includes Informal and Formal Appeals P.—I ID Woberbdod flNidantl•I/Commercial OriBitil Value —.1 al Prdu .. 080fi093562 1002 0. 188900 Sfi3W 080]140980 ]002 8 62300 0 • New report since last Business Meeting Update oN73333 ;W A 2',9,W sb on October 21si pBpJ46303 113 fl �951 ° • Property value reductions by neighborhood and individual parcel 9886899)fi5 ]003 0. 28156] 15fi300 • Includes value changes resulting from both qgg°pg,°g ooa n n111= 22= 9gg]°14141 1oa; g ]1a°9 a informal and formal appeals 98g]1R0896 �3 fl 211. p 988]802649 1003 ]32900 I—..988]8312. ]003 0. 2T1300 0 98g2905453 1003 212]00 R"'16900 • Delineates residential from commercial OW7482022 1004 R 208606 0 _149894g ]004 432300 17300 properties190811�5 7551'7 a— fi°R 11211 151�1 11. 989]585299 ]004 R 641100 ]BI00 9898553fiO3 ]004 R 253500 0 9898551423 1004 A 504800 0 ,908624452 1005 R 432400 51800 0808945g85 1.1 1 IN" 0809029988 ]005 fl 248500 42200 9g9883]906 1., F 159900 ° 9g988399]5 ]005 fl 160f00 16000 6 The uve of parentneses era negative number indlcatrs an lnnease In value- t 28 Slide#7 Orange County NBC Review Neighborhood - Reviews • Tax Office identified 171 neighborhoods for additional review Pink-outside 86 outside statistical standards statistical standards for vertical equity • Teal-<5 sales; 76 had fewer than five sales selected by Tax Office and appeared to require review for consistency and Orange-identified by reasonableness the Orange County 19 identified by the Orange Property Tax Justice County Property Tax Justice Coalition Coalition -- ORANGE COUNTY 7 NIDR- I CAROLINA Slide #8 Neighborhood Review Status Orange County 2025 Neighborhood Review Status Data as of: November 26,2025 Neighborhoods Reviewed 152 Habitat Property Count 757 Properties w/Value Change 1460 Habitat Property Value Reduction $ t5,751.7M Total Value Reduction $60,972,300 • 89%of Neighborhood reviews completed Assessed value reductions for 1,460 properties Properties with value changes are sent change notices and have 15 days to appeal to the Board of Equalization and Review • $60.9 million reduction to tax base • Adjustments to 257 additional Habitat for Humanity properties that have resale restrictions limiting an open market, arms length transaction 8 ORANGE COOUNA Y 29 Slide#9 Common Issues Identified • Tanner Valuation Group identified common issues in the Neighborhood Reviews that warranted a reduction In assessed value: 1. Not adequately discounting assessed value for deferred maintenance • Roadside evaluations on exterior of properties done on approximately 17%of taxable parcels No assessment of interior deferred maintenance 2. Applying general mass appraisal methodologies in neighborhoods with diverse housing types • Question added to the Tax Assessment Work Group RFP for consulting services on best practices in identifying, verifying, and accounting for deferred maintenance ORANGE COUNTY S NORTH CARCILINA Travis Myren explained that there could be an older owner-occupied structure next to a student rental, next to a very modernized home, making mass appraisal methodology difficult to apply fairly, unlike more uniform neighborhoods. Slide #10 Questions? ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Commissioner McKee said for him, the diverse housing types in the same neighborhood is the main issue. He said even if it requires on-site reviews of those properties, he wants that issue to be addressed. Vice-Chair Fowler confirmed this had been brought to the Tax Assessment Work Group and was included in RFP questions about efficient ways to identify deferred maintenance through drive-bys, flyovers, or potentially Al based on building age. 30 8. Consent Agenda • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to approve the consent agenda. VOTE: UNANIMOUS a. Minutes for November 6, 2025 Business Meeting and November 11, 2025 Work Session The Board approved the draft minutes for the November 6, 2025 Business Meeting and November 11, 2025 Work Session. b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds The Board adopted a resolution to release motor vehicle property tax values for three (3) taxpayers with a total of eight (8) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. c. Property Tax Release/Refund The Board adopted a resolution to release a property tax value for one (1) taxpayer with a total of one (1) bill that will result in a reduction of revenue. d. Purchase of Vehicles for Transportation Services Department The Board approved and authorized Orange County Fleet Services to purchase three (3) Ford Transit 350 Lightning E-Motors Conversion vans and one (1) Ford E-450 Lighting E-Motors Conversion van to provide accessible transportation options to individuals with disabilities who are unable to use the fixed-route bus service. e. Health Department Fee Changes The Board approved changes to the Personal Health Services fee schedule as recommended by the Board of Health and amend the FY 2025-26 County Fee Schedule. f. Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5 The Board approved budget, grant, and capital project ordinance amendments for Fiscal Year 2025-26. g. Transit Scheduling and Dispatch Software Agreement Approval and Approval of Budget Amendment#5-A The Board approved the Services Agreement for Transit Scheduling and Dispatch Software and approved Budget Amendment#5-A. h. Resolution Supporting JCPC Legislative Requests for Increased Funding This item was added at the beginning of the meeting. The Board approved a Resolution Supporting NC Division of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Legislative Requests for Increased Recurring Funding for Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils (JCPC), Community Programs, Juvenile Crisis and Assessment Centers, Short-Term Residential Contract Sites, Transitional Living Programs, Medical/Mental Health Crisis Unit Capacity Increase, and NC Secure All Firearms Effectively Campaign. 9. County Manager's Report Travis Myren had no report for the Board. 10. County Attorney's Report John Roberts had no report for the Board. 31 11. *Appointments a. Orange County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council (JCPC) —Appointments Discussion This item was added at the beginning of the meeting. The Board discussed and approved appointments to the Orange County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council (JCPC). BACKGROUND: The N.C. Department of Public Safety partners with the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council (JCPC) to galvanize community leaders, locally and statewide, to reduce and prevent juvenile crime. JCPC members are appointed by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). Members represent nineteen (19)different fields/organizations, and the BOCC may also appoint up to seven (7) at-large members. Since the BOCC decided at its December 1, 2025 Business meeting not to appoint a county commissioner to the JCPC and instead pursue appointing a staff designee, new information has emerged regarding who may be eligible to serve in certain JCPC positions. The Manager recommends that the BOCC consider the following appointment, and also consider appointing a county commissioner to the JCPC: NAME POSITION TYPE OF TERM DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION TERM DATE Caitlin County Commissioner Partial Term 6/30/2026 Fenhagen Appointee BOCC Member County Commissioner Partial Term 6/30/2026 Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board, introduced the item. A motion was made by Commissioner Bedford, seconded by Vice-Chair Fowler to appoint Deputy County Manager, Caitlin Fenhagen, to the JCPC. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Bedford volunteered to serve as the commissioner appointee if no one else wanted to, noting she'd served before. She referenced the racial disproportionality in juvenile justice in Orange County, recalling a report former Commissioner Richardson brought to the Board from two and a half years ago showing numbers are higher than she anticipated. Commissioner Fowler and McKee briefly discussed that the BOCC member seat was different from what Commissioner Carter had previously held. They clarified that after deciding Commissioner Carter wouldn't give up the seat, they initially weren't going to fill it, wanting a designee which wasn't allowed under the bylaws. Commissioner Carter added context about the evolving interpretation of bylaws - they believed they could designate someone, but the County Attorney clarified it didn't require a commissioner, leading to their decision to bring in Caitlin Fenhagen, though they'd now evolved to wanting a commissioner in the role. A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to appoint Commissioner Bedford as the County Commissioner on the JCPC. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 32 12. Information Items • December 1, 2025 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List • Tax Assessor's Report— Release Refunds Under$100 • Memorandum — Update on Human Services Work Group • Memorandum — Update on Orange County Trails Plan • Memorandum — Update on Orange County Bike and Pedestrian Plan 13. Closed Session At 8:20 p.m., a motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, to enter in to closed session pursuant to North Carolina General Statute § 143- 318.11(a)(3), "to consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body," and § 143- 318.11(a)(9), "to discuss and take action regarding plans to protect public safety as it relates to existing or potential terrorist activity and to receive briefings by staff members, legal counsel, or law enforcement or emergency service officials concerning actions taken or to be taken to respond to such activity." VOTE: UNANIMOUS Reconvene into regular session A motion was made by Commissioner Bedford, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to reconvene into regular session at 9:54 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Vice-Chair Fowler said there was a discussion in closed session that led to the following motion: Vice-Chair Fowler made a motion, seconded by Commissioner McKee, that the Staff Working Group pause all work plan amendments until annual agreements are in place and the financial policies and procedures are revised, enhancing transparency, and suitable and acceptable to finance staff and governing boards of the member local governing organizations and that the County Manager convey the Board of Commissioners' direction to the Staff Working Group. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Adjournment A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Jean Hamilton, Chair Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board