HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 04-07-2026; 8-a - Minutes for March 5, 2026, March 10, 2026, and March 17, 2026 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: April 7, 2026
Action Agenda
Item No. 8-a
SUBJECT: Minutes for March 5, 2026, March 10, 2026, and March 17, 2026
DEPARTMENT: Board of County
Commissioners
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Draft Minutes (under separate cover) Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board, 919-
245-2130
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the draft minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board
as listed below.
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board
has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's
proceedings.
Attachment 1: March 5, 2026 Business Meeting
Attachment 2: March 10, 2026 Work Session
Attachment 3: March 17, 2026 Business Meeting
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports:
• GUIDING PRINCIPLE — COMMUNICATION AND AWARENESS
We provide information and opportunities for engagement in a transparent manner so that
all in our community have knowledge, understanding, and a voice.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
Attachment 1
1
1 DRAFT MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY
3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
4 BUSINESS MEETING
5 March 5, 2026
6 7:00 p.m.
7
8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Thursday, March 5,
9 2026, at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Building in Hillsborough, NC.
10
11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT. Chair Jean Hamilton, Vice-Chair Amy Fowler, and
12 Commissioners Jamezetta Bedford, Marilyn Carter, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-
13 Ascott
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT. None.
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
17 Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below.)
19
20 Chair Hamilton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.All commissioners were present.
21
22 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
23 A motion was made by Commissioner Carter, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, to add
24 a discussion on large-scale data center development as item 6-c
25
26 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
27
28 Chair Hamilton read the public charge and reviewed the instructions for making public
29 comment.
30
31 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
32 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
33 David Terrell read a statement regarding the establishment of a Cedar Grove Veterans
34 Memorial. Speaking on behalf of the Northern Orange County Veterans Association (NOVA), he
35 explained their proposal to create a memorial at the Cedar Grove Community Center. The
36 memorial would consist of an indoor panel listing names of individuals who attended Cedar Grove
37 School between 1951 and 1969, and outdoor inlaid bricks around the existing Flag Plaza honoring
38 all veterans from World War II to the present. NOVA identified over 200 veterans in the Cedar
39 Grove community with no current recognition beyond VA grave markers. The estimated cost for
40 the indoor panel is approximately $30,000, while the outdoor elements would be self-funded
41 through brick sales and other revenue sources. NOVA has committed to maintaining the Flag
42 Plaza, flying flags 24/7, and providing resources to veterans. David Terrell requested the Board
43 consider and approve the project.
44 Gary Linz expressed concerns about an incident involving the transfer of his property to
45 another individual without his knowledge or consent, which he discovered when he was
46 investigated by Bank of America for fraud when he applied for a loan. While his property was
47 returned to him, he said that he has not been given satisfactory answers from the county about
48 how this occurred. He does not believe it was a clerical error as he has been told by county staff.
49 He said he will continue to speak at commissioners' meetings on this issue going forward.
50
51
2
1 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
2 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.)
3
4 3. Announcements, Petitions, and Comments by Board Members
5 Commissioner McKee strongly endorsed the Cedar Grove veterans' memorial request,
6 noting he and Commissioner Bedford had met with David Terrell and GI Allison recently. He asked
7 staff to check available funding, indicating approximately$4,500 may already be available for the
8 wall panel. Commissioner McKee made two additional petitions: first, asking the board to instruct
9 staff to work on a 2% reduction across the board for the upcoming budget, and second,
10 announcing he would bring a motion for the board to endorse an additional 5% cut to
11 commissioner salaries, believing the budget pain should be equally shared. He concluded his
12 remarks by acknowledging his recent loss in the primary and shared a poem about counting
13 blessings instead of crosses.
14 Commissioner Bedford supported Commissioner McKee's petition for the veterans'
15 memorial, noting she had also met with the veterans and that staff indicated the project could
16 move forward with phased funding, starting with available funds and working toward the full
17 $30,000 needed over time.
18 Commissioner Carter reported on her visit to Washington, DC with Commissioner Portie-
19 Ascott for the National Association of Counties (NACO) legislative conference from February 21-
20 24. They met with North Carolina's congressional delegation, and she shared that North Carolina
21 had the largest state contingent at the conference. Key topics included nutrition, healthcare,
22 disaster recovery, mental health, farmland preservation, transportation, cybersecurity, tax policy,
23 and election security. They also met with Japan's ambassador to thank him for Morinaga's
24 investment in Orange County. Commissioner Carter noted remarkable bipartisan alignment on
25 housing affordability and concerns about federal cost-shifting to counties. She then addressed
26 the recent military conflict in the Middle East, acknowledging the impact on community members
27 with family and friends in affected regions and those with deployed family members, while
28 describing the conflict as occurring in a country with systematic citizen oppression and controlled
29 media and elections.
30 Commissioner Portie-Ascott thanked Commissioner McKee for his comments and
31 supported his petition for the Cedar Grove Community Center. She acknowledged a resident's
32 concern about a recent Sons of Confederate Veterans gathering in the Research Triangle Park
33 area, emphasizing that conversations attempting to reinterpret or minimize racism and
34 Confederate history can be troubling for community members. She stressed the importance of
35 acknowledging history honestly to build an inclusive community. Commissioner Portie-Ascott also
36 acknowledged community heartbreak over the conflict in the Middle East, noting that while foreign
37 policy is federal, global events carry emotional weight for local families and faith communities.
38 She elaborated on the NACO conference, highlighting the value of multiple commissioners
39 attending to bring back broader perspectives. She said a major conference theme was housing
40 supply challenges, noting that 84% of Orange County's land is under restrictions limiting water
41 and sewer access, reflecting environmental and farmland preservation commitments but requiring
42 strategic housing planning. She discussed federal resources like Community Development Block
43 grants and Section 108 loan guarantee programs, and was particularly struck by conversations
44 about partnering with faith-based organizations that have land and community service
45 commitments to create affordable housing opportunities.
46 Commissioner Greene congratulated Commissioner Bedford on her victory in the primary
47 and provided updates on transit initiatives. She reported on a GoTriangle meeting where the
48 agency received a $17.7 million federal grant for modernizing bus operations facilities, thanks to
49 Congresswoman Deborah Ross's office. She highlighted the Triangle Mobility Hub development
50 as part of the Research Triangle Park's reinvention from a bedroom community to a workplace
51 with housing options. Commissioner Greene provided statistics on the low-income Transit
3
1 Assistance Program (TAP), which serves over 10,000 unique riders, 70% of whom are employed,
2 with 24% reporting they would struggle to pay grocery bills without the program. The annual
3 program cost is $353,000, with Orange County's transit plan contributing $28,000. She also
4 discussed the Triangle West Destination 2055 document, emphasizing strong connections
5 between land use and transit planning for mixed-use development within a half-mile of frequent
6 transit
7 Vice-Chair Fowler thanked other commissioners for their comments, the veterans in
8 attendance, and the service members who lost their lives in the most recently initiated conflict.
9 She noted attending the Triangle West meeting, where they approved the 2055 MTP plan, which
10 includes comprehensive bike, pedestrian, public transit, and technology components for
11 congestion improvement. She reported on a Tax Assessment Work Group meeting featuring
12 presentations from commercial appraiser Paul Snow and Stanley County's in-house appraiser
13 Clinton Swearingen about the pros and cons of in-house appraisal services. She said the next
14 Tax Assessment Work Group meeting will review RFQ responses from two organizations. She
15 concluded by acknowledging Women's History Month.
16 Chair Hamilton thanked other commissioners for their thoughtful comments. She
17 petitioned for the Board to recognize March 15th as International Long COVID Awareness Day,
18 noting that one in six North Carolinians experience long COVID, with many suffering severely
19 despite COVID being considered over. She planned to bring a formal recognition to the March
20 17th meeting. Hamilton encouraged individual commissioners to respond directly to a resident's
21 email about concerning groups in the county, feeling that it was not appropriate for her to respond
22 on behalf of the board. She also reminded commissioners to review a petition requesting that the
23 board sign a resolution asking Governor Stein to examine Duke Energy, noting individual
24 responses were welcome, but board action would require discussion.
25
26 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/Special Presentations
27 a. Women's History Month Proclamation
28 The Board approved a proclamation designating March 2026 as Women's History Month in
29 Orange County.
30
31 BACKGROUND: The celebration of Women's History Month traces its roots to the socialist and
32 labor movements in New York City. The first Women's Day took place on February 28, 1909,
33 marking the one-year anniversary of the garment workers' strikes in which thousands of women
34 marched for economic rights. This strike followed another in 1857, when garment workers took to
35 the streets demanding equal rights and a 10-hour workday. Within two years, the movement grew
36 into an international event. In 1975,the United Nations officially recognized International Women's
37 Day, which will be celebrated on March 8, 2026.
38
39 When Women's History Month was first established, feminists in the United States saw it as an
40 opportunity to highlight the contributions of women — contributions that had been largely
41 overlooked in American history. The celebration began as a national observance in 1981, when
42 Congress authorized and requested that President Jimmy Carter proclaim the week of March 7,
43 1982, as "Women's History Week." In 1987, the Women's History Month Project successfully
44 petitioned Congress to expand the celebration to the entire month of March. President Ronald
45 Reagan was the first to issue a proclamation declaring March as Women's History Month.
46
47 Today, local, state, and federal government agencies continue this tradition, recognizing March
48 as Women's History Month with events, programs, and celebrations.
49
50 The County will again be hosting the same Color Me Bad Event similar to last year. This event is
51 a Women's Retreat examining rest as resilience and resistance. Tricia Hersey, an American poet,
4
1 performance artist, and activist, popularized this concept, arguing that rest is a direct challenge
2 to systems of oppression that demand constant productivity, especially from women. The Color
3 Me Bad event will occur on March 28, 2026.
4
5 Chief Civil Rights Officer, Paul Slack, reviewed the background information for the item.
6
7 Commissioners read the following proclamation in turn:
8
9 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
10 WOMEN'S HISTORY MONTH
11 PROCLAMATION
12
13 WHEREAS, American women of every race, class, and background have shaped our
14 nation through their innovation, creativity, and leadership—successfully rewriting the narrative for
15 a nation that has not always recognized their contributions; and
16
17 WHEREAS, American women have played and continue to play vital economic, cultural,
18 and social roles in every sphere of the life of the nation—excelling in academics, the arts, politics,
19 medicine, sports, and beyond —while navigating challenges both seen and unseen; and
20
21 WHEREAS, women have been at the forefront of every major progressive social change
22 movement, often advocating for justice when their own struggles were overlooked, including the
23 suffrage movement, the abolitionist movement, the industrial labor movement, the Civil Rights
24 Movement, and many more; and
25
26 WHEREAS, the courage of countless trailblazing American women has shattered barriers
27 and glass ceilings, inspired people regardless of gender, sparked groundbreaking discoveries,
28 and propelled America toward a more just and equitable society; and
29
30 WHEREAS, despite critical contributions, women's stories have too often been
31 marginalized in the teaching and retelling of history, making it our collective responsibility to uplift
32 and honor the women who have shaped our past and continue to shape our future; and
33
34 WHEREAS, the 2026 national theme for Women's History Month —"Leading the Change:
35 Women Shaping a Sustainable Future" — celebrates women who are reimagining and rebuilding
36 systems to ensure long-term sustainability across environmental, economic, educational, and
37 societal spheres, and it invites all communities to recognize and support women's leadership in
38 creating a future that works for everyone; and
39
40 WHEREAS, Orange County is committed to fostering True Community, which Reverend
41 Dr. Pauli Murray defined as "being based upon equality, mutuality, and reciprocity," and will
42 continue to elevate the dialogue on women's history and their collective power in shaping a more
43 just and equitable society;
44
45 NOW, THEREFORE, do we, the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North
46 Carolina, hereby proclaim March 2026 as "Women's History Month" and commend this
47 observance to Orange County residents, urging them to recognize the women in their lives with
48 appropriate programs, activities, and celebrations that reflect this year's theme of leadership and
49 sustainable change.
50
51 THIS THE 5th DAY OF MARCH, 2026.
5
1
2
3 Jean Hamilton, Chair
4 Orange County Board of Commissioners
5
6
7 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Fowler, to approve
8 and authorize the Chair to sign the proclamation.
9
10 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
11
12 b. Final Report on Neighborhood Reviews and Revaluation Appeals
13 The Board received a report on neighborhood level reviews and property tax appeals following
14 the 2025 revaluation and to provide input on future reporting for the 2026 appeal period.
15
16 BACKGROUND: The Board of Commissioners received an update on neighborhood reviews and
17 property tax appeals at the December 9, 2025 Business Meeting. This report provides a final
18 analysis of the completed neighborhood reviews, the value adjustments resulting from those
19 reviews, and the geographic distribution of the reviews.
20
21 Neighborhood Reviews
22 Early in the 2025 tax year, the Tax Office conducted an equity analysis on the County's 1,026
23 assessment neighborhoods using International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO)
24 statistical standards. The Tax Office reviewed the neighborhoods with five (5) sales or more and
25 identified 86 neighborhoods that were outside of the equity standards used by the IAAO. Of the
26 neighborhoods with less than five (5) sales, the Tax Office examined those neighborhoods for
27 consistency and reasonableness and identified an additional 76 neighborhoods that required a
28 more thorough review. The Tax Office also included twenty (20) neighborhoods identified by the
29 Orange County Property Tax Justice Coalition (OCPTJC) for possible value adjustments, and
30 reviewed Habitat for Humanity home values based on deed restrictions. A total of 172
31 neighborhoods were identified by the Tax Office for closer review.
32
33 At the July 31, 2025 meeting of the Board of Equalization and Review, the Tax Office asked the
34 Board to grant the authority to review these neighborhoods and make changes as needed. The
35 Tax Office selected Tanner Valuation Group (TVG) to assist in the review through the Request
36 for Proposals process.
37
38 The Tax Office reviewed the neighborhoods that make up the Northside Neighborhood
39 Conservation District prior to TVG being hired. Supplemental work and field reviews were
40 completed on these neighborhoods by TVG. Tax Office staff also made changes to Habitat for
41 Humanity homes based on deed restrictions on those homes that affect resale value. All other
42 neighborhoods were reviewed by Tanner Valuation Group, and recommendations were made to
43 the Tax Office. The Tax Office reviewed the recommendations and made value adjustments
44 accordingly.
45
46 Of the 172 neighborhoods reviewed, recommedations for value adjustments were made for
47 properties in 57 of those neighborhoods. 2,761 properties received a value change resulting in an
48 overall reduction of $98,757,700. Of these properties, 257 were the Habitat for Humanity
49 referenced above. The total value reduction for the Habitat properties was $15,751,700. Tanner
50 Valuation Group recommended no changes in value for the remaining 115 neighborhoods
51 identified for further review.
6
1 Tanner Valuation Group provided a Summary Report for the Orange County 2025 Reappraisal
2 Findings and Recommendations which is included as Attachment 3.
3
4 Appeal Status
5 The Tax Office received 3,380 informal appeals during the informal appeal window from March
6 21 through April 30, 2025. Of those informal appeals, 2,148 resulted in adjustments to the value
7 of the property, or 64% of the appeals. Total value reduction was $201,005,498 which is an
8 average reduction of$93,578. All informal decision notices were mailed as of November 26, 2025.
9
10 The formal appeal period was April 1 through July 31, 2025. There were a total of 1,038 formal
11 appeals, and 686 resulted in adjustments to the value of the property, or 66% of the appeals. The
12 total value reduction was $158,887,883, resulting in an average reduction of$231,615.
13
14 The Fiscal Year 2025-2026 budget assumed a tax base reduction of 3%, or $936,162,977,
15 resulting from the appeal process. The total value reduction from appeals was$359,893,381. The
16 overall value reduction including appeals and neighborhood reviews is $458,651,081, which is a
17 reduction of 1.47%.
18
19 As of February 25, 2026, there have been thirty-four (34) appeals to the North Carolina Property
20 Tax Commission (PTC) with a total of 94 properties. To compare to previous revaluation years:
21 ➢ 2009 — 120 PTC appeals
22 ➢ 2017 —22 PTC appeals
23 ➢ 2021 — 12 PTC appeals
24
25 The last of the formal appeal decision notices were mailed on February 20, 2026. There is a 30-
26 day window for the property owner to appeal to the PTC from the date the final decision notices
27 were mailed, which means that the number of 2025 PTC appeals could increase.
28
29 Nancy Freeman, Tax Administrator, made the following presentation:
30
31 Slide #1
f
ORANGE COUNTY
NC3RTH CAROLINA
Tax Office Neighborhood Review
Report and Appeal Results
Board of Commissioners
Business Meeting
March 5, 2026
32
1 Slide #2
Hurpose
• To receive reports on neighborhood level reviews and
property tax appeals following the 2025 revaluation.
• To provide input on the content of the reports and on the
content and frequency of future reporting requirements for
2026 appeal period.
ORANGE COUNTY
2 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #3
Background
The most recent update on neighborhood reviews and
property tax appeals was at the December 9, 2025 Business
Meeting.
This presentation provides:
Final report on Neighborhood Reviews, value adjustments
resulting from those reviews, and geographic distribution of
the reviews.
Final report on 2025 Appeals, completed February 11 , and
maps of both the informal and formal appeals.
ORANGE COUNTY
3 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
8
1 Slide #4
The Need for Neighborhood Review
• After the 2025 Revaluation notices were mailed, questions arose about the vertical equity in
Orange County's Revaluation.
• Many concerns were raised by Orange County Property Tax Justice Coalition (OCPTJC).
• Tax Office used vendor services for an analysis county-wide using multiple metrics, with a
conclusion that Orange County was largely within statistical norms.
• Tax Office also conducted a neighborhood level analysis internally and 172 neighborhoods were
identified for further review.
• After dialogue with Habitat for Humanity staff and research, it was noted that some Habitat For
Humanity homes needed further review.
• Tax Office asked the Board of Equalization and Review (BOER)to direct staff to review the
neighborhoods and Habitat properties and make changes as needed.
• Tanner Valuation Group (TVG)was hired to review the neighborhoods. ORANGE COUNTY
4 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #5
Neighborhood Review Results
• 172 neighborhoods were reviewed and 57 neighborhoods saw some sort of
adjustment.
• Tax Office reviewed the neighborhoods that make up the Northside
Neighborhood Conservation District before Tanner Valuation Group (TVG) was
hired and made changes to the properties based on information provided by the
Coalition. Additional work was done on these neighborhoods by TVG.
• County staff reviewed Habitat for Humanity properties and changes were made
to 257 based on deed restrictions that had not been noted previously in the
County's record resulting in a reduction of $15,751 ,700.
• 2,763 total properties received a value change resulting in an overall reduction of
$98,757,700. ORANGE COUNTY
5 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
9
1 Slide #6
Neighborhood Review Findings — Tanner
Valuation Group
Tanner Valuation Group provided a statement to summarize what
was found in their review:
While there are several factors that can cause Vertical Inequity in
mass appraisal, the main cause in Orange County was due that
properties with deferred maintenance were assessed using the
same methodology as properties that were either
renovated/remodeled, or properties that have been maintained
throughout the years.
�1
s ORAN GE H ECOUNATY
2
3
4 Slide #7
Neighborhood Review Findings — Tanner
Valuation Group
Additional points identified by Tanner Valuation Group:
• Orange County has
— "unique neighborhoods"
— conservation districts and restrictions
— some neighborhoods with elevated land values compared to similar
neighborhoods
• Some neighborhoods that were found to be statistically out of acceptable
range during the identification of neighborhoods for review are within range
when excluding sales from 2021 and 2022 and focusing on the more recent
2023 and 2024 sales.
ORANGE COUNTY
7 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
10
1 Slide #8
Neighborhood Review Findings — Tanner
Valuation Group
Additional points identified by Tanner Valuation Group:
• A county-wide calculated Standard Time Adjustments was used in the original statistical
analysis, and TVG recommends that county-wide calculated time adjustments not be
used because different parts of the county experienced growth at different rates.
• Vacant sales should also be excluded from statistical analysis. Orange County
experienced a substantial increase in vacant sales during 2021 and 2022. This could
skew the data as most land sales would be on the lower end of the valuation scale and
those property values may now include improvements resulting in significantly higher
ratios.
• Information related to the interior quality of the properties in identified neighborhoods
was provided by the Coalition and would have otherwise been unavailable to_the Tax
Office. ORANGECOUNTY
OUNTY
8 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #9
Neighborhood Review Recommendations — Tanner
Valuation Group
• Analyze all sales to make sure the property data and characteristics
accurately match the property at the time of sale. Make sure to avoid sales
chasing.
• Incorporate the use of Neighborhood Factors further into practice.
• Spend additional time and analysis on upper end properties for the next
revaluation.
• Review base rates, residential in particular is likely low.
• Consider switching from one land line per property to multiple count
GE
for residual acreage. ORNo H CAROOLINA Y
5
6
7
11
1 Slide #10
Neighborhood Review Recommendations — Tanner
Valuation Group
Orange County has some "unique neighborhoods" with situations very few
other counties have. For example, there are neighborhoods that have all of
these types of properties:
• owner occupied
• business owned student rentals
• very poor condition with deferred maintenance
• extensively renovated
• properties with obvious signs of gentrification.
Additional time should be spent on these unique neighborhoods for the next
revaluation.
�1
ORANGE COUNTY
10 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #11
Neighborhood Review Statistics
Current calculation of the primary statistical measures based on the 2023 and
2024 sales as recommended by TVG are listed below.
Only Reviewed Neighborhoods Current Acceptable Range
Median 0.994 .9 to 1.1
COD 7.059 5.0 to 15.0
PRO 1.02 .98 to 1.03
Only Neighborhoods with Changes
Median 0.984 .9 to 1.1
COD 8.041 5.0 to 15.0
PRO 1.019 .98 to 1.03
County Wide,All Neighborhoods
Median 0.999 .9 to 1.1
COD 5.785 5.0 to 15.0
PRO 1.014 .98 to 1.03 �
ORANGE COUNTY
11 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
12
1 Slide #12
Neighborhood Review Statistics Meanings
Median Sales Ratio -Assessed Value/Actual Sales Price
1.0—Assessed value matches sales price
Above 1.0—Assessed value is greater than sales price
Below 1.0—Assessed value is below sales price
➢ COD - Coefficient of Dispersion measures horizontal uniformity in a sales
ratio study, and shows how tightly individual property assessments are
grouped around the median.
y PRD Price Related Differential (PRD) — measures uniformity of sales ratios
between low and high values properties
A PRD close to 1.0 indicates neutral assessment practices
- A PRD above 1.0 indicates higher-value properties are under-assessed (regressive assessment).
A PRD below 1.0 means higher-value properties are over-assessed (progressive assessment
12 ORANGE ECOUNATY
2
3
4 Slide #13
Neighborhood Reviews — Additional Appeal
Any property that received a change in value due to the neighborhood review
received a value change notice, which allowed them the opportunity to appeal that
value.
Of the 2,763 properties that received a change in value from the neighborhood
reviews, 17 appealed the new value.
All appeals were residential properties
Total reduction $585,600
Thirteen received additional reduction from their appeal
One property increased in value
Three properties did not change
ORANGE COUNTY
13 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
13
1 Slide #14
Finding Your Neighborhood
• "Neighborhood" — In property valuation, a defined geographic area, or a
group of complementary land uses, containing properties that share similar
market, economic, and physical characteristics. Also known as market area.
• 1,026 defined neighborhoods in Orange County, identified by neighborhood
codes (NBC)
• Go to County's GIS Maps:
https://qis.orangecountync.gov/orangeNCGIS/default.htm
— Enter PIN, owner name, or address
— See Review Results, your neighborhood code, or NBC is shown at the bottom
�1
is ORANGE ECOUNATY
2
3
4 Slide #15
Finding your Neighborhood — GIS Results Page
Results List
LANDVALUE 2838M
BLDGVALUE 356200
BLDGCNT 1
VALUATION "DODO
TAXSTATUS A
FARMUSE
USEVALVE 0
DEEDREF ...
LFOALREF
DATESOLD Mar 9 2010 12 00AM
TAXSTAMPS 0
STAMPVALUE 0
YEAR BUILT 2000
SQFT 2178.75
SUBDIVISION—NAME
CONDO NAME
SCHOOL_SYSTEM Orange County Schools
NBC 3D021
ORANGE COUNTY
5 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6 Nancy Freeman went to the Orange County GIS website and demonstrated how to find
7 an NBC and how to use the code to see all the properties in a neighborhood.
8
9
10
14
1 Slide #16
2025 Revaluation Appeals
• In addition to Tanner Valuation Group assisted with data collection for
informal and formal appeals.
• Original estimate for reduction to Tax Base was 3%, or $936,162,977
• At completion of formal appeals, reduction is at 1.47%, or $458,651,081.
— This is in line with the amount of reduction at the 2021 revaluation, which was 1.5%
• Additional reduction expected from next step in appeals process to the NC
Property Tax Commission.
�1
16 ORANGE ECOUNATY
NC32
3
4 Slide #17
2025 Revaluation Appeals - Informal
• 3,380 Informal appeals received through April 30, 2025
— 3,204 Residential, 176 Commercial
• 2,148 resulted in adjustments, 64% of the total informal appeals
— Total reduction $201,005,498
— 14.6% of beginning value
— Average reduction $93,578
— 2,079 Residential, 69 Commercial
ORANGE COUNTY
17 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
15
1 Slide #18
2025 Revaluation Appeals - Informal
• 388 of informal appeals also appealed formally to the Board of
Equalization and Review (BOER)
— Total reduction $10,957,700
— 361 Residential, 27 Commercial
• At BOER, 300 had additional reduction,10 increased, 78 had no
change
— Total reduction $37,115,588
�1
18 ORAN GE COUNTY
NTO2
3
4 Slide #19
2025 Revaluation Appeals - Formal
• The Board of Equalization and Review is a 3-member volunteer board
— Apply to the Board of Commissioners
— Appointed by the Board of Commissioners for a 2-year appointment
• 2025 Board of Equalization and Review (BOER) held meeting to convene
May 5, 2025 to begin accepting formal appeals
■ 15 pre-adjournment meetings
■ 2025 BOER adjourned July 31, 2025
■ 58 post-adjournment meetings to hear all appeals received through July 31st
■ Final meeting February 11, 2026
ORANGE COUNTY
19 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
16
1 Slide #20
2025 Revaluation Appeals - Formal
• There were 1 ,038 formal appeals
— 869 Residential
— 169 Commercial
• Total Reduction $158,887,883
— 686 resulted in adjustments, 66% of the total formal appeals
— Average reduction $231,615
— 612 Residential
— 74 Commercial
�1
zo ORANGE ECOUNATY
2
3
4 Slide #21
North Carolina Property Tax Commission Appeals
• As of February 19, there have been 34 appeals to the NC
Property Tax Commission (PTC)
❑ Includes 94 properties
• 79 of the properties are residential and total $27,428,600
• 15 of the properties are commercial and total $154,543,500
• Window for PTC appeals will end March 25, 2026.
ORANGE COUNTY
21 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
17
1 Slide #22
Looking Forward — 2026 Appeals
• Currently have received 148 Informal Appeals
• Appraisers have completed 128 of those appeals
• Notice of Decisions will be mailed early April and have the option
to appeal formally
• Value change notices for new construction and others will be sent
late February so they may appeal informally.
• First version of 2026 Appeals Dashboard will be provided at the
early April BOCC meeting
ORANGE COUNTY
22 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3 Commissioner Bedford asked if this is the first opportunity for people who had homes
4 damaged during Tropical Storm Chantal to have their adjustments considered.
5 Nancy Freeman said yes.
6 Chair Hamilton asked if value change notices are also sent to people who have renovated
7 their homes.
8 Nancy Freeman said yes.
9 Chair Hamilton confirmed the Board would like staff to maintain the 2026 Appeals
10 Dashboard.
11
12 Slide #23
Looking Forward — 2026 Board of Equalization and Review
• 2026 Board of Equalization and Review will convene April 31 St
• Members will be encouraged to attend:
— NC Department of Revenue presentation that covers "The Charge to the
Board"
— UNC-School Of Government Best Practices for BOER Webinar
• 2025 BOER requested Tax Staff to note several matters during
2025, and bring those matters to the 2026 BOER for review
— concerning changes in procedures
— will include advising staff attorney
ORANGE COUNTY
23 NORTH CAROLINA
13
18
1 Chair Hamilton requested that training be made mandatory rather than encouraged and
2 asked to receive training information to determine formal policy requirements. She asked what
3 changes to the procedures are being made.
4 Chad Phillips explained that the changes primarily involve commercial property
5 representation rules and scheduling time allocations.
6
7 5. Public Hearings
8 None.
9
10 6. Regular Agenda
11 a. Approval of Employee Health and Dental Insurance Renewal and Continued
12 Participation in the North Carolina Health Insurance Pool
13 The Board approved employee health and dental insurance premium equivalent rates for the plan
14 year July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, and approved continued participation in the North
15 Carolina Health Insurance Pool (NCHIP).
16
17 BACKGROUND: The County provides health and dental benefit plans for employees and their
18 families, as well as health benefit plans for pre-65 retirees. The Board of Commissioners has the
19 responsibility to approve the health and dental insurance rates each fiscal year. This approval is
20 made in advance of the annual budget so staff can hold an open enrollment period prior to the
21 beginning of the fiscal year, July 1. Open enrollment is scheduled for the period of April 27, 2026,
22 through May 10, 2026.
23
24 Health Insurance
25 In FY 2019, the Board of County Commissioners approved Orange County's participation in the
26 North Carolina Health Insurance Pool. Based on stable claims experience, from FY 2019 through
27 FY 2022, the County maintained no increases in premium equivalent rates for health insurance
28 and dental coverage for employees and pre-65 retirees.
29
30 In subsequent years, the Board approved 5% increases in premium equivalent rates for health
31 insurance coverage each year through FY 2025 and a 6% increase in FY 2026. The County has
32 absorbed the cost of these increases and has not increased the employee contribution to the
33 health plan for active employees or pre-65 retirees since 2015.
34
35 Funding for the health plan is based on estimated premium equivalent rates that are calculated
36 to pay for incurred claims, administrative and reinsurance costs, and expected liability of claims
37 Incurred but Not Reported (IBNR). The plan also carries a reserve balance which helps to ensure
38 the County's ability to pay any claims that exceed the budgeted amount in any given year.
39
40 Best practice recommends maintaining reserves between 1.5 and 3.0 times IBNR. Based on the
41 December 2025 IBNR liability of $922,644, the recommended reserve range is between $1.4
42 million and $2.8 million. A target of approximately two (2) times the IBNR, or $1.85 million, is
43 recommended to stabilize the fund.
44
45 The County's current fund ratio is—1.3% as of December 2025 indicating that reserves are below
46 the target. Increasing premium equivalent rates to cover actual claims incurred will provide the
47 opportunity to help build reserves in the future.
48
49
19
1 Financial Review
2 The following table details the Count 's claims experience from FY20 through FY25.
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25
Jul 19-Jun 20 Jul 20-Jun 21 Jul 21-Jun 22 Jul 22-Jun 23 Jul 23-Jun 24 Jul 24-Jun 25 YoY Change
Ivied$ $6,895,698 $8,857,216 $10,946,908 $8,883,956 $9,921,942 $10,689,943 8%
Rx$ $3,611,785 $3,362,195 $3,666,862 $4,257,610 $5,138,699 $7,173,975 40%
Total$ $10,507,483 $12,219,410 $14,613,770 $13,141,565 $15,060,642 $17,863,919 19%
Average Employees Covered 1078 1050 1024 1064 1111 1127
Avg Per Claimant Per Year $9,743 $11,635 $14,278 $12,349 $13,558 $15,846
Banded Layer$>40K $1,740,760 $2,701,986 $27,772,535 $2,547,489 $3,140,986 $4,150,593
Banded Layer Claimants>40K 45 57 53 73 74 88
Stop Loss Reimbursements $647,818 $549,098 $2,165,540 $483,352 $611,414 $767,884
Stop Loss Claimants 2 4 8 2 2 1`
#of Claimants over$1 OK 221 262 266 296 357 414
#of Claimants over$20K 111 130 139 149 182 208
3 'ISL increased from$200K to$400 K
4
5 From FY 2020 through FY 2025, the Health Insurance plan has experienced increases in the
6 frequency and severity of large claimants, overall increases in gross claims, and growth in plan
7 enrollment.
8
9 From FY 2024 to FY 2025, the cost of total claims increased by $2,803,277 or approximately
10 19%. Of that increase, medical claims increased by $768,001 or approximately 8%, while
11 pharmacy claims increased by over$2 million or 40%.
12
13 Cost of Claims
14 Actuarial analysis from NCHIP recommends a 12.5% rate increase to both the employee and
15 employer share of premium equivalents to meet the cost of expected claims. If the County absorbs
16 the entire cost of this increase and does not increase employee contributions, the County's cost
17 would need to increase by a total of 13.7%.
18
19 Pharmacy Cost Drivers
20 One of the primary cost drivers for pharmacy claims is the increased use and high relative cost
21 of GLP-1 drugs for weight loss.
22
23 o Approximately 100 members are using GLP-1's for weight loss.
24 o The cost of covering these medications for weight loss is approximately$1 million.
25 o Other employers that have continued to cover the GLP-1's have also needed a
26 "catch up" increase as employers did not anticipate the demand associated with
27 these drugs.
28
29 Medical Cost Drivers
30 The primary cost drivers for medical claims are more varied.
31 • The cost of cancer treatments and other cancer therapies have increased by 34%. New
32 treatments are being discovered, approved, and put into use with unprecedented
33 frequency. As the covered population continues to age, cancer rates are also expected to
34 increase.
35 • The cost of musculoskeletal outpatient surgeries has increased by 11%.
36 • The cost of psychiatry, primary care, and specialist visits has increased by 12%. The
37 utilization of these services by individuals covered by the Orange County plan is above
38 the industry standard.
20
1 Enrollment Increases
2 In addition to the cost of claims, employee enrollment in the County plan has increased over time.
3 Enrollments have increased 7% over the past five (5) years. The most significant increases have
4 occurred in employee-only plans which are 100% County funded. The number of enrollments for
5 employee-only plans has increased by 12% over the past five (5) years, or by approximately 80
6 enrollments.
7
8 Considerations for Cost Containment Measures
9 Staff have explored several strategies to manage rising costs while maintaining current benefits
10 and is recommending that the Board consider two changes to the health insurance plan design.
11
12 1. Implement a RxSaveCard for GLP-1's used for weight loss
13 • The RxSaveCard offers a projected savings of $500,000 annually based on current
14 utilization.
15 • The RxSaveCard provides a mechanism for consumers to have direct relationships with
16 GLP-1 drug manufacturers through Lilly Direct and NovoCare.
17 • This direct-to-consumer relationship lowers the cost to the health plan by eliminating the
18 premium associated with the Pharmacy Benefit Manager that would otherwise serve as
19 an intermediary between the manufacturer, pharmacy, and consumer. For example, the
20 cost of a Wegovy prescription under the County's current plan is $950 per month. The
21 direct-to-consumer price is $350, saving the health plan $600 per month.
22 Instead of insurance plan coverage for this drug, employees would purchase medications
23 directly from the manufacturer. In practice, employees would receive an RxSaveCard,
24 and the County would provide a subsidy of$375 on this card each month for the employee
25 to purchase their medication. If the actual cost of the prescription is less than the $375
26 monthly subsidy, the excess funding is returned to the County. For example, the direct-
27 to-consumer price of the Wegovy injectable medication is$350. Since the County subsidy
28 ($375) is greater than the direct-to-consumer cost, the employee receives the drug for$0,
29 and $25 is returned to the County at the end of each month. The savings and cost to the
30 employee under this plan are detailed in the table below.
CURRENT PBM RxSaveCard
Drug Dose Estimated Employee Direct Price OC Subsidy Employee
Insurance Price Monthly monthly
(after rebate) Cost(PPO) cost
Wegovy(inj) all $950 $25 $350 $375 $0
Zepbound (inj) low $850 $25 $299 $375 $0
Zepbound (inj) mid $850 $25 $399 $375 $24
Zepbound (inj) high $850 $25 $449 $375 $74
Wegovy (oral) low $800 $25 $149 $375 $0
Wegovy (oral) mid $800 $25 $249 $375 $0
31 Wegovy (oral) high $800 $25 $229 $375 $0
32
33 • The only drug for which the employee would have to contribute is for the Zepbound
34 injectable at medium and high doses. Those prescriptions would carry an employee
35 responsibility of$24 and $74 respectively. The current co-pay under the County's current
36 plan is $25.
37
38 2. Implement a Surcharge for Spousal Health Insurance Coverage when Alternative
39 Coverage is available to the Spouse
21
1 • Implement a$200 per month surcharge to the employee contribution for spousal coverage
2 when spouse has health insurance coverage with their employer.
3 • Currently, 144 spouses are enrolled in the County's health plan. Staff from the North
4 Carolina Health Insurance Pool (NCHIP) estimate that 20% of spouses or approximately
5 29 spouses would choose to remain on the County plans despite having alternative
6 coverage.
7 • If those employees were charged an extra $200 to maintain spousal coverage, direct
8 revenue to the plan would increase by $70,000.
9
10 Below is a chart showing the estimated direct financial impact:
11
Spousal Surcharge Modelin
Current Covered Spouses 144
Estimated % w Other Coverage 20%
Monthly Surcharge Amount $200
Estimated Spouses Impacted 29
Estimated Surcharge Revenue $69,120
Surcharge Revenue Offset $69,120
12
13 The spousal surcharge may also have an indirect savings to the plan by discouraging
14 migration to the County's plan from coverage available to the spouse of a County
15 employee. The County currently contributes an additional $600 per month to move
16 from an employee only plan to an employee plus spouse plan and an additional $800
17 per month to move from an employee plus children plan to a full family plan.
18 Discouraging migration to the County plan has the potential to save the additional
19 County premium contribution associated with coverage a spouse as well as the
20 additional cost of claims incurred by the spouse. Predicting the claims savings is
21 difficult without direct experience.
22
23 Dental Insurance
24 The County provides dental coverage for active employees. No rate increase is recommended
25 for FY 2026-27.
26
27 Brenda Bartholomew, Human Resources Director, reviewed the background information
28 for the item. She made the following presentation:
29
30
22
1 Slide#1
OC Health Insurance
Renewal
For enrollment period July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027
Orange County Board of Commissioners
March 5, 2026
2
3
4 Slide #2
Key Insights from FY26/27 Renewal Discussion
OC Current Financials
What factors are driving the increase in health care costs
Cost Containment Considerations
5
6
7
8
23
1 Slide #3
1
Orange County Current Financials with NCHIP
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY28 FY24 FY25 From FY 2020 through FY 2025,the
Jul 19-Jun 20 Jul 20•Jun 21 Jul21-Jun 22 Jul 22•Jun 23 Jul 23•Jun 24 Jul 7A•Jun 25 YoYChange Health Insurance plan has experienc
Ned $6,895,698 $8,857,215 $10,946,908 $6,863,956 $9,921,942 $10,689,943 8% increases in the frequency and severity of
RK$ $3,611,785 $3,362,195 $3,666,862 $4,257,610 $5,138,s99 $7,173,975 40% large claimants,overall increases in gr s
Total$ $10,507p83 112,219,410 $14,613,770 $13,141,566 $15,060,842 $17,963,919 19% claims,and growth in plan enrollment.F
Average Em ployees Covered 1078 1050 1024 1064 1111 1127
kg PerChimaM PerYear $9,743 $11,635 $14,278 $12,319 $14560 $16,e46 From FY 2024 to FY 2025,the cost of t
Banded Layer$>40K $1,740,760 $2,701,986 $27,72,535 $2,547,489 $3,140,986 54,150,593
Banded Layer Claimants 540K 45 57 53 73 74 claims increased by$2,803,277 or
Slap Lose Reimbursements $647,818 $549,098 $2,165,540 $463,352 $611,414 $767,884 approximately 19%.
Slap Loss Claimants 2 4 8 2 2 1'
• Of that increase, medical claims increase
001Cielmenls over 51OK 221 252 266 296 357 414 by$768,001 or approximately 8%,while
#o(Cle mants over$20K 111 130 139 149 182 206 pharmacy claims increased by over$2
'13L in,Nseu Gam 52M to$400 K million or 40%.
2
3
4 Slide #4
What factors are driving the increase in health care cost
Healthcare costs are rising faster than enrollment, driven primarily by pharmacy and high-cost
claims.
Claims Have Increased Pharmacy is the Primary Driver
Significantly
Pharmacy increased 40%in one year
FY24 to FY25: +$2,8M (19%) Over$2M increase in Rx.alone
• Major contributor to renewal pressure
TOW I Claims Trend(FY20-FY25)
Pharmacy(Rx)Growth(FY20-FY25)
L7 To
Lfi 6
�L60
E 5.5
�L
12 �
5
6
7
8
9
10
24
1 Slide#5
Cost Drivers
Medical Cost Drivers
Pharmacy Cost Drive
� Cancer treatments+34%
Musculoskeletal surgeries +11%
Behavioral Et specialist visits+12% GLP-1 drugs for weight loss
✓ 100 members utilizing
✓ $1M annual cost
✓ Usage far exceeded projections
2
3
4 Slide #6
Health Insurance Renewal - Status Quo
Recommended Status Quo Renewal
• 13.68%employer impact if County absorbs full increase
Employ ostincrease %Increase
Contributi.7n $ C
• Cost $15,470,177
$17,587,217 $2,117,040 13.68% I
5 AWL
6
7
8
9
10
25
1 Slide #7
LOSt Containment Strategy Considerations
• RxSaveCard Monthly Surcharge for Spousal
Require use of RxSaveCard for Coverage
coverage of GLP-1 drugs for weight $200 per month surcharge if spouse has
loss alternative coverage available
Direct to consumer approach— Would applyto Employee+Spouse Plan and
prescriptions received from Family Plan
manufacturer by mail
Employee receives$375 monthly 144 spouses currently enrolled in County
health plan.
allowance
Drug costs below$375 per month NCHIP estimates 20%or 29 spouses would
are returned to the County remain on County plan
v$500,000 savings projected based Potential revenue increase to the plan
on continued utilization -$64,000
May deter spousal migration to County plan
Positive impact on employee costs from other coverage
for most prescriptions
- Avoids increased cost of spousal claims
2
3
4 Slide #8
RxSaveCard provides a direct-to-
consumer relationship with GLP-1 drug
RxSaveCard manufacturers,Lilly Direct and
NovoCare
CURRENTP9M RasaveCard Eliminates cost associated with the
o,,,g Dow Esil lad Employ a oimwPri•a ocsubsidy Employeepharmacy Benefits Manager(PBM)
Insurance Price Monthly nonlhly
Jaftrrehffie) Cml(l anal
Wegovy Cmp all $950 $25 $350 $375 $o
Zephoond(Inj) low $850 s25 $zse $375 $o Wegovy Injectable Example:
Zell(inj) mid ettiso $25 $ass $375 $24 $950 per month=cost to current plan
Zephound(inj) high $W $25 $449 $375 $74
Wegovy(oral) low W $25 $149 $375 $o $350 per month=cost direct-to-
Wegovyloral) mid $aoo $25 $249 $375 $o consumerplan through RxSaveCard
Wegovy(oral) high $W0 W5 =9 $375 $0
• $600 per month savings to County plan
Reduces employee costs for most
prescriptions from$25 per month to$0
with exception of Zepbound Injectable
I
5
6
7
8
9
10
26
1 Slide#9
Manager's Recommendation
• Continue participation in NCHIP; and
• Approve one of the plan design options as outlined in the
DesignPlan following table; and
Option Approve the renewal for dental insurance with no changes
Comparison
IWFY25/26 $15,470,177
atus quo $17,587,217 13,68% $2,117,040 $2,117,040 13.68%
xSave Card $16,486,356 6.57% $1,016,179 $450,000 $1,466,179 9.48%
•. Spousal Surcharge $17,517,217 13.23% $2,047,040 $2,047,040 13.23%
Option 4 Option 2 and 3 $16,416,356 6.12% $946,179 $450,000 $1,396,179 9.02%
2
3
4 Slide #10
QUESTIONS
5
6
7 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, to
8 approve the continued participation in the North Carolina Health Insurance Pool, approve option
9 #4 for plan design and associated employer costs, and approve the renewal for dental insurance.
10
11 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12
27
1 Commissioner Bedford thanked Brenda Bartholomew for the presentation and for the rX
2 card option for employees.
3 Commissioner McKee thanked staff for these cost-saving options. He said the resulting
4 increase is more reasonable.
5 Chair Hamilton said she thinks it is important to invest in employees and help them do the
6 best job that they can do for the county.
7
8 b. Orange County's Proposed 2026 Priority Legislative Issues
9 The Board reviewed and discussed the proposed Orange County 2026 Priority Legislative Issues
10 as developed by the Legislative Issues Work Group (LIWG), and approved the Top 5 Orange
11 County 2026 Priority Legislative Issues and the full list of twenty-one (21 ) Priority
12 Legislative Issues for submittal to Orange County's legislative delegation.
13
14 BACKGROUND: Orange County's Legislative Breakfast with Orange County's legislative
15 delegation, in conjunction with the 2026 North Carolina General Assembly session, is scheduled
16 for March 23, 2026. The Board of Commissioners has historically approved a set of priority
17 legislative issues each year for presentation to/discussion with the delegation.
18
19 The Board historically has designated two members to work with staff on a Legislative Issues
20 Work Group (LIWG) to develop a proposed legislative priorities document. Based on the work of
21 the LIWG, the BOCC has then reviewed and approved a package of legislative items to present
22 to Orange County's legislative delegation. Commissioners Phyllis Portie Ascott and Marilyn Carter
23 are serving on the 2026 LIWG and have worked with staff on the attached 2026 legislative
24 materials.
25
26 As the LIWG considered its approach for this year, the Group determined to identify a list of
27 Legislative Priority Issues in conjunction with:
28 • The North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) Legislative Advocacy
29 Goals; and
30 • Orange County's Strategic Plan Goals/Priorities.
31
32 During its review, the Group identified twenty-one (21) Priority Legislative Issues (Attachment 2).
33 From that list, the Group determined its "Top 5 Priority Legislative Issues" (Attachment 1). It is
34 recommended that the Board review the proposed Top 5 Legislative Issues as well as the full list
35 of twenty-one (21) items, consider modifying both documents as may be necessary based on
36 discussion, and consider any other potential revisions.
37
38 It should also be noted that the LIWG has been developing an expanded document regarding the
39 Orange County 2026 Priority Legislative Issues that provides background information and talking
40 points for the priority issues. Upon completion, that document will be shared with Board members
41 and staff for use as pursuit of the Board's adopted Legislative Priority Issues moves forward.
42
43 Following discussion of and any amendments to Attachments 1 and 2, the Board is asked to
44 approve both documents. Staff will then work with the Chair to share the approved documents
45 with Orange County's legislative delegation in preparation for discussion at the March 23, 2026
46 Legislative Breakfast.
47
48 The work of the Legislative Issues Work Group to this point is based on the current information
49 available for the 2026 General Assembly Session. The issues addressed by the Group may
28
1 evolve and change over the session and require additional attention by the Group and Board of
2 Commissioners. New issues may also arise necessitating additional review.
3
4 Greg Wilder, Assistant to the County Manager for Legislative Affairs, reviewed the
5 background information for the item.
6 Commissioner Portie-Ascott explained that the new format of the document provides
7 talking points and local impact information to help commissioners defend goals at NACO steering
8 committee meetings and assist the legislative delegation in understanding Orange County's
9 specific impacts.
10 Commissioner Carter noted that the document underwent multiple iterations to achieve
11 alignment, highlighting the top five priorities: agricultural and farmland preservation, housing
12 preservation, behavioral health capacity, health services and local detention facilities, and tax and
13 finance protecting county fiscal stability. The broader list addresses environmental protection,
14 clean water, watershed protection, storm resilience, disaster recovery, rural water and sewer
15 infrastructure, workforce housing, transportation access, and education workforce development.
16 Chair Hamilton thanked the work group and staff for their work on the alignment.
17 Commissioner Greene questioned including the longer list, preferring to focus on five
18 priorities as the Board had previously decided.
19 Commissioner Portie-Ascott explained that the additional items acknowledge strategic
20 priorities and prevent important issues from being lost.
21 Vice-Chair Fowler advocated for six priorities by adding public education, noting that half
22 the county's budget goes to schools and adequate state funding would reduce pressure on the
23 county. She wanted to include pre-K investment advocacy and opposition to school vouchers for
24 families already attending private schools. She also emphasized the need for specific Medicaid
25 codes for behavioral health urgent care centers to be included under the behavioral health priority.
26 Commissioner McKee supported keeping five focused goals while noting that
27 commissioners could individually contact legislators about other issues. He shared an example
28 of contacting legislators about controlling rogue agritourism operations affecting legitimate
29 farmers.
30 Chair Hamilton reminded the Board that this is the document used to talk to delegation at
31 the Legislative Breakfast. She said they don't have to just stick to 5 and can make sure the
32 document works for the Board.
33 Commissioner Bedford supported the new format and suggested adding bullet points
34 under public education for pre-K emphasis and voucher reduction, plus adding back the IDD
35 waiver wait list clearing under health and human services, noting over 17,000 people wait for
36 services with only 1,000 new vouchers added in recent years.
37 Vice-Chair Fowler raised questions about water and sewer infrastructure expansion
38 conflicting with current WASMPBA agreements restricting such expansion. She also advocated
39 for non-partisan redistricting inclusion.
40 Commissioners discussed the water/sewer language, with Commissioner Carter clarifying
41 the intent was seeking funding for infrastructure work rather than legislation to change restrictions.
42 Commissioner Greene suggested changing "legislation" to "funding" and adding invasive
43 species research funding.
44 After Board discussion, Chair Hamilton called for individual positions on the addition of
45 support for non-partisan redistricting. With five commissioners supporting, non-partisan
46 redistricting was added to the list.
47 The Board reached consensus on the following amendments:
48
49 • Top priorities increased from five to six by adding public education
50 . Added pre-K investment and school voucher opposition under education
51 • Added IDD innovation waiver wait list clearing under health services
29
1 . Added Medicaid code for behavioral health urgent care centers
2 . Added non-partisan redistricting under general government
3 . Changed water/sewer language from "seek legislation" to "seek funding"
4 • Added invasive species research funding support under environment
5
6 Chair Hamilton said the talking points in the packet are good for the NCACC meetings,
7 but also for commissioners when talking in the community.
8
9 A motion was made by Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to approve
10 the Top 6 Orange County 2026 Priority Legislative Issues document, as amended, and the full list
11 of twenty-one (21) Priority Legislative Issues, as amended, for submittal to Orange County's
12 legislative delegation.
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16 Greg Wilder confirmed that the legislative breakfast packet would include both amended
17 attachments plus the eight-page talking points document as supplemental information.
18
19 c. Discussion on Larne-Scale Data Center Development in Orange County
20 This item was added at the beginning of the meeting.
21
22 Commissioner Carter introduced this agenda item, explaining that NACO's Legislative
23 Conference strongly encouraged counties to prepare for the data center industry's arrival by
24 reviewing potential impacts and assessing land use guardrails.The explosive growth in computing
25 power and data centers driven by Al creates concerns about utility impacts on residential bills and
26 water usage demands for cooling systems. She referenced Loudoun County, Virginia's
27 experiences and noted bipartisan North Carolina legislation from previous sessions addressing
28 resident protection from electrical utility impacts, including House Bills 638 and 1002. She noted
29 the timing was appropriate given the World Day for Water proclamation in the consent agenda.
30
31 A motion was made by Commissioner Carter, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, for
32 the Board to direct County staff to prepare a presentation for our next Business Meeting on
33 March 17, 2026 that addresses the following:
34
35 1. The potential impacts of large-scale data center development in Orange County,
36 including electricity demand, water usage, land use compatibility, environmental
37 considerations, and potential impacts on residents' utility costs, and water quality.
38
39 2. Policy options available to the County, including, but not limited to, a temporary
40 moratorium on data center development, revising the Orange County Land Use Plan and
41 UDO, and the legal process required to implement each option.
42
43 3. Recommendation(s)for Board action.
44
45 Commissioner McKee noted land has reportedly been purchased in Person County for a
46 data center that would draw power from Mayo Lake Power Station via lines running through
47 Orange County, potentially raising rates countywide.
48 Commissioner Portie-Ascott supported gathering additional information to understand
49 impacts.
50 Vice-Chair Fowler agreed, noting that data centers provide few jobs relative to their utility
51 costs and environmental impacts.
30
1 Commissioner Bedford requested that environmental considerations include noise and
2 environmental justice issues, suggesting consultation with experts, including the Southern
3 Environmental Law Center.
4 Commissioner Greene mentioned Loudoun County's experience with data centers
5 generating substantial property tax revenue from computer equipment, but warned against
6 reliance on single revenue sources, given other negative impacts.
7 Vice-Chair Fowler noted that data centers aren't addressed in the current UDO and should
8 be considered in the comprehensive plan update.
9
10 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
11
12 7. Reports
13 None.
14
15 8. Consent Agenda
16
17 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
18 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
19 • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
20
21 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Greene, to approve
22 the consent agenda.
23
24 Commissioner Greene commented on the Transit Employee Appreciation Week
25 proclamation, noting that Orange County's fixed routes are currently fare-free for the year.
26
27 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
28
29 a. Minutes for February 3, 2026 Business Meeting and February 10, 2026 Work Session
30 The Board approved the minutes for the February 3, 2026 Business Meeting and February 10,
31 2026 Work Session.
32 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
33 The Board adopted a resolution to release motor vehicle property tax values for four(4)taxpayers
34 with a total of four (4) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue.
35 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
36 The Board adopted a resolution to release property tax values for eight (8) taxpayers with a total
37 of nine (9) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue.
38 d. Late Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
39 The Board approved two (2) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem
40 taxation for two (2) bills for the 2025 tax year.
41 e. Try Transit Week and Transit Employee Appreciation Day Proclamation
42 The Board approved a proclamation recognizing the week of March 16, 2026 as Try Transit Week
43 in Orange County and March 18, 2026 as Transit Employee Appreciation Day.
44 f. World Water Day Proclamation
45 The Board approved a proclamation designating March 22, 2026 as World Water Day in Orange
46 County.
47 g. Orange County Creek Week 2026 Proclamation
48 The Board approved a proclamation declaring March 21-29, 2026, as "Orange County Creek
49 Week".
50
31
1 h. Approval of Professional Services Agreement for Animal Services Improvements
2 The Board:
3 1) Approved the County entering into a professional services agreement with Smith Sinnett
4 Architecture, P.A., for the Animal Services Improvements; and
5 2) Authorized the County Manager to execute the Agreement, subject to final review by the
6 County Attorney, and any subsequent amendments for contingent and unforeseen requirements
7 up to the approved budget amount on behalf of the Board of Commissioners.
8 L Whitted Complex Chiller Installation Service Contract Award
9 The Board:
10 1) Approved the County entering into a service contract with Brady Trane Service, Inc. for
11 the purchase of services to install a replacement chiller and chilled water pumps at the Richard
12 E. Whitted Complex; and
13 2) Authorized the County Manager to execute the Agreement, subject to final review by the
14 County Attorney, and any subsequent amendments for contingent and unforeseen requirements
15 up to the approved budget amount on behalf of the Board.
16 j. Approval of Eno Arts Mill Suite 17 Lease Amendment for Orange County Arts
17 Commission
18 The Board approved Amendment One to the Eno Arts Mill Suite 17 Lease.
19 k. Approval of Memorandum of Understanding NOW between the Town of Carrboro and
20 Orange County for County Enforcement of Carrboro's Erosion and Sedimentation
21 Control (E&SC) Regulations
22 The Board adopted a resolution approving amendments to an existing Memorandum of
23 Understanding (MOU) between the Town of Carrboro and Orange County regarding the provision
24 of Erosion Control services by Orange County to the Town as requested by the Town to support
25 its Stormwater and Erosion Control program, its delegated authority granted by the North Carolina
26 Environmental Management Commission (NC EMC), and the Town's mandated program
27 requirements administered by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC
28 DEQ).
29 I. Professional Services Contract with Catawba Valley Engineering and Testing, P.C., for
30 Lake Orange Intake Tower Replacement Project Geotechnical Services
31 The Board approved a professional services contract in the amount of $97,075 with Catawba
32 Valley Engineering and Testing, P.C., for Professional Geotechnical Services (hereafter the
33 "Project").
34 m. Amendments to the Series 2019 A and B Limited Obligation Bond Documents
35 The Board adopted a resolution related to an Orange County request to the North Carolina Local
36 Government Commission (LGC) to amend the financing documents associated with its 2019
37 Limited Obligation Bonds (Series 2019A and Series 2019B) to reallocate remaining bond
38 proceeds to eligible project costs.
39
40 9. County Manager's Report
41 Travis Myren reminded the Board about the work session next Tuesday.
42
43 10. County Attorney's Report
44 John Roberts addressed two items. First, he acknowledged Commissioner McKee's
45 earlier comments about large farm parties and noted ongoing cross-aisle legislative discussions
46 about addressing such issues, with hopes for presentation in the short session. Second, he made
47 his annual inquiry about proposed local bills, noting departments had no requests and asking
48 commissioners to consider any local bills they might want to present to the delegation, requesting
49 advance notice for proper language preparation.
50
51
32
1 11. *Appointments
2 None.
3
4 12. Information Items
5 • February 17, 2026 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
6 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis
7 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections
8 • Tax Collector's Report— In-Rem Foreclosure Progress Report
9 • Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under$100
10 • Memorandum — Funding Request from Veterans Memorial Committee
11
12 13. Closed Session
13 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, to enter
14 in to closed session pursuant to North Carolina General Statute § 143-318.11(a)(3), to consult
15 with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client
16 privilege between the attorney and the public body regarding the national opioid litigation, number
17 1:17-and-02804 and other topics.
18
19 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
20
21 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
22 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Fowler, to
23 reconvene into regular session at 9:29 p.m.
24
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 Adjournment
28
29 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Fowler, to adjourn
30 the meeting at 9:29 p.m.
31
32 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
33
34 Jean Hamilton, Chair
35
36
37 Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board
38
39 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board
Attachment 2
1
1 DRAFT MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY
3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
4 WORK SESSION
5 March 10, 2026
6 7:00 p.m.
7
8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Session on Tuesday, March 10,
9 2026, at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC.
10
11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jean Hamilton, Vice-Chair Amy Fowler, and
12 Commissioners Jamezetta Bedford, Marilyn Carter, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis
13 Portie-Ascott
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
17 Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Chair Hamilton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present.
21
22 1. Boards and Commissions —Annual Work Plan Summaries
23 The Board received brief presentations from representatives from the second group of County
24 boards and commissions on their annual work plan summaries and provide feedback and/or
25 direction.
26
27 BACKGROUND: Each year, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) requests that County
28 boards and commissions complete reports on the activities each board conducted over the past
29 year and a plan for future activities consistent with the BOCC's strategic goals. The Chairs or
30 other board representatives make presentations to the BOCC to share information in their written
31 reports. The Board received the first group of work plan presentations at the February 10, 2026
32 work session.
33
34 Boards and commissions presenting at this meeting are:
35
36 Board Name Representative(s) Presenting
37 Orange Unified Transportation Board Michael Hughes
38 Orange County Board of Adjustment Leon Meyers
39 Orange County Planning Board Lamar Proctor
40 Advisory Board on Aging Dr. Tracey Holsinger
41 Adult Care Home & Nursing Home Community Jackie Podger and
42 Advisory Committee Shade Little
43 Board of Health Tony Whitaker
44 Board of Social Services Oscar Fleming
45 Economic Development Advisory Board Emilee Collins
46 Chapel Hill-Orange County Visitors Bureau Advisory Board D.R. Bryan
47 Arts Commission Denise Duffy
48
49 Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board, introduced the item.
50
2
1 Michael Hughes of the OUTBoard highlighted the board's key accomplishments for 2025,
2 which include expanding community engagement through initiatives such as the creation of a
3 departmental newsletter and the organization of strategic community outreach events. He said
4 they are coordinating with the Parks and Recreation Commission to align bike and pedestrian
5 initiatives with trail plans. He said they also initiated fare-free self-service on fixed routes,
6 increased support for demand response services, and developed plans for five new transit
7 vehicles. He said future initiatives focus on enhancing the multimodal network, finalizing trail
8 plans, boosting public engagement, and securing funding through collaboration with NCDOT. He
9 said they also plan to add bus shelters at key locations and a real-time transit dashboard.
10 Art Menius of the OUTBoard said they will be working more with transit and monitoring
11 infrastructure and connectivity across local, regional, and utility corridors to strengthen the
12 countywide multimodal transportation system. He said they will strengthen the transportation
13 planning process by increasing involvement through targeted public engagement efforts.
14 Commissioner Carter expressed excitement about fare-free service and expanded service
15 to Mebane, noting interest from other counties at a recent NCACC meeting.
16 Vice-Chair Fowler said she appreciated the OUTBoard's community engagement.
17 Commissioner Greene asked for more information on the bicycle and trails plan.
18 Sarah Williamson, Interim Transportation Director, said they are in the process of drafting
19 the bike and pedestrian plan and it will be available in the next few months.
20 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked for information on transportation barriers for families
21 accessing JCPC services.
22 Sarah Williamson said she would investigate it and provide more information.
23 Commissioner McKee encouraged keeping fare-free service permanent beyond the trial
24 period
25 Vice-Chair Fowler said she appreciated their efforts on the bike and pedestrian plan and
26 along with the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group.
27 Leon Meyers of the Orange County Board of Adjustment said they operate on an as-
28 needed basis to handle special use permits, variances, and appeals of staff decisions. heard three
29 requests for special use permits and one request for a variance. He said they do not have any
30 vacancies.
31 Lamar Proctor of the Orange County Planning Board said they were very busy in 2025
32 with reviewing zoning and UDO changes and making recommendations to the Board of County
33 Commissioners. He said they did five conditional zoning changes in 2025. He noted staff's role
34 in understanding the complexity of UDO language amendments. He said they reviewed and made
35 changes to preliminary subdivision plats. He said there are ongoing discussions to transition this
36 to a staff-reviewed process. He said there will be significant work on the land use plan and UDO
37 amendments for conservation subdivisions. He said they continue to train new members and
38 noted staff's role in this process. He said they continue to monitor growth in the county from the
39 City of Mebane. He said they would like to have an informal meeting with the Board of County
40 Commissioners so they can better understand the Board's philosophies. He said they want to
41 investigate rural activity nodes and what type of development can be done there. He said they
42 continue to discuss broadband internet and wireless access in the county as well as transportation
43 issues. He said the joint agreements with the municipalities will be a focus as the comprehensive
44 land use map is updated. He said they are always looking at watershed review implications. He
45 said they are interested in alternative water and waste disposal methods for areas without access
46 municipal services.
47 Commissioner Carter thanked the Planning Board for their work.
48 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked for more information on the Planning Board's concerns
49 about Mebane's growth.
50 Lamar Proctor said they are looking for certainty on how far Mebane intends to grow in
51 the county.
3
1 Chair Hamilton said that the Board will meet with the City of Mebane on March 19.
2 Commissioner McKee thanked the Planning Board for their work and said he reads their
3 meeting minutes closely.
4 Vice-Chair Fowler also expressed her appreciation to the Planning Board.
5 Tracy Holsinger of the Advisory Board on Aging, with Vice Chair Joanne Wilson, praised
6 the Department of Aging's accomplishments under Janice Tyler's leadership. She said the
7 department improved elder care and now leads statewide efforts in aging plans. She said key
8 achievements include the respite program for dementia caregivers in its second year, the "Aging
9 Well Together" broadcast hitting 100 episodes, and "Sibling Out on the Edge" for older LGBTQ
10 adults. She said the advisory board seeks to enhance access to care and social safety net
11 services. She said they would like to provide enhanced programming for those aged 55-64 facing
12 increased work requirements, and financial aid for taxes, Medicare, and healthy aging initiatives
13 Commissioner Greene thanked the board for their work and said that systems like
14 Medicare enrollment are deliberately complex.
15 Tracey Holsinger said program volunteers offer Medicare expertise assistance.
16 Joanne Wilson noted the wide range of programming at the Senior Center for helping older
17 adults.
18 Commissioner McKee agreed and commented that all the programming and offerings
19 described apply to him.
20 Vice-Chair Fowler said that they also support the senior games and she recently signed
21 up.
22 Commissioner Bedford said her family has also benefitted from the Senior Center's
23 programming, including the Medicare class.
24 Chair Hamilton thanked the board for their work and said that the department works
25 together to serve everyone.
26 Jackie Podger and Shade Little of the Adult Care Home & Nursing Home Community
27 Advisory Committee presented the committee's workplan. Jackie Podger said that the training
28 requirements have increased and described the extensive process members must go through
29 before they can be appointed to the committee. She said they have a very active group of ten
30 members. She said they have been working with a new ombudsman. She said they want to
31 continue the relationships with administrators, activity directors, and resident council members.
32 She said they continue to stress the importance of activities and socialization. She said that the
33 new ombudsman has helped the committee improve relationships with one facility and they are
34 working with a second facility that plans to open six ventilator beds.
35 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked for clarification of the ventilator beds.
36 Jackie Podger said a nursing home in the county is planning to offer ventilator beds due
37 to low occupancy, but it requires changes to infrastructure as well as staffing and nursing
38 standards.
39 Commissioner Carter said she'd like to hear a follow-up report on the committee's
40 engagement with facilities.
41 Shade Little said the quality of the facilities in Orange County are very good. He asked
42 the Board to let the community know, because they would like more engagement with facilities.
43 Chair Hamilton asked about the impacts of staffing shortages on facilities.
44 Jackie Podger said that facilities with low staff and restricted budgets are unable to call
45 other agencies for help, so they are doing the best they can. She said that in those situations
46 residents wait for services they need.
47 Shade Little said that despite the challenges, many of the staff they meet still have positive
48 attitudes. He described how hard the staff work under difficult conditions and low pay.
49 Tony Whitaker of the Board of Health described the board's monthly meetings and
50 activities. He said they assist with accreditation for the Health Department. He said their activities
51 center around three focus areas from their strategic plan, which comes from the Community
4
1 Health Assessment report. He said those are: access to care, behavioral health, and connections
2 to community support. He said while they cannot make changes to improve public health, they
3 can recommend changes. He said they want to educate and learn more about affordable housing
4 needs. He described the photo voice project the Board of Health is working on. He said they've
5 recently reviewed the budget and have improved internal processes to make sure that the
6 department is collecting insurance revenue from clinical services.
7 Vice-Chair Fowler thanked the Board of Health for their service.
8 Commissioner McKee said he is currently on the Board of Health and is attending their
9 upcoming meeting.
10 Oscar Fleming of the Board of Social Services reviewed the accomplishments of the
11 Department of Social Services. He said that the department worked hard to reduce the impacts
12 of the budget shortfall while still serving residents. He requested that staffing levels be maintained
13 to meet the needs of residents.
14 Vice-Chair Fowler asked how much funding is needed for Social Services.
15 Oscar Fleming said he didn't have an exact number, but they are asking for the
16 department's needs to be met and to avoid deeply cutting their budget.
17 Commissioner Carter said impacts to SNAP and Medicaid are being felt nationwide and
18 that at the recent legislative conference, people from both sides of the aisle were unified on the
19 need to delay implementation.
20 Oscar Fleming acknowledged DSS staff and their efforts during so much uncertainty.
21 Chair Hamilton thanked the Board of Social Services and acknowledged the need to
22 protect the most vulnerable.
23 Emilee Collins of the Economic Development Advisory Board highlighted the board's
24 initiatives to enhance the local economy by fostering small business growth, agriculture, and
25 expanding the non-residential tax base. She said the board met six times to review grant
26 applications, notably supporting two investment programs: the Small Business Investment Grant
27 Program, which awarded $156,232 across 30 grants, and the Agriculture Economic Development
28 Grant Program, distributing $115,639 through 13 grants. She noted the move of French
29 manufacturer Citel to the county. She said the board would like additional funding for small
30 business and agricultural grant advertising.
31 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked for more information on the advertisement program.
32 Steve Brantley, Economic Development Director, said they have a small advertisement
33 budget which they would like to increase in the next fiscal year. He described the increase in
34 planned advertisement and said that ads can cost between $2,000 and $50,000.
35 Commissioner Bedford asked if incentive payments will be higher in the next few fiscal
36 years.
37 Steve Brantley said yes. He said they will provide an incentive spreadsheet showing the
38 costs over the next several years.
39 D.R. Bryan of the Chapel Hill-Orange County Visitors Bureau Advisory Board described
40 the activities of the board and the economic impacts of tourism. He said a consultant advised
41 that the board look at the structure of the board and the limitations on the board. He suggested
42 reviewing how the local tourism development authorities (TDAs) operate. He said the consultant
43 suggested reviewing their mission statement and vision. He also said that the consultant
44 suggested promoting visitation to Hillsborough. D.R. Bryan said that the advisory board will bring
45 the recommendations to the Board of Commissioners.
46 Vice-Chair Fowler asked for more information on the local tourism development
47 authorities.
48 D.R. Bryan said that information will be brought to the Board.
49 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked about a statement in the advisory board's workplan to
50 audit short-term rentals.
5
1 D.R. Bryan said they want to make sure that short term rentals are complying with
2 requirements and laws.
3 Laurie Paolicelli, Visitor Bureau Director, said that the municipalities all have differing
4 views on short-term rentals. She said they are trying to stay in conversation with everyone.
5 Vice-Chair Fowler asked for information on the statement that they are rebuilding the Town
6 of Chapel Hill's contribution.
7 Laurie Paolicelli described the tensions with occupancy tax collection and said that the
8 advisory board wants to study it before bringing recommendations to the Board of County
9 Commissioners.
10 Commissioner McKee said the conversation could be difficult, but they should tread
11 carefully because one cannot anticipate what the General Assembly might do.
12 Laurie Paolicelli said they are hoping to work on the issue locally.
13 Denise Duffy of the Arts Commission described the accomplishments over the last year,
14 noting the significant impact Tropical Storm Chantal had on the commission's programming. She
15 highlighted community support for the Arts Commission after the storm. She said they distributed
16 $95,000 in artist relief grants after the storm, and hosted the Uproar festival two weeks later. She
17 noted the visitor data from the festival and that it resulted in $84,000 in private support. She said
18 that they are planning a summer festival, expanding programming, and launching a new website.
19 She said $1 of arts grant funding generates $16 in local spending. She expressed appreciation to
20 the staff for their hard work through a challenging time.
21 Commissioner Greene highlighted the artist relief grants given by the Arts Commission to
22 artists impacted by the tropical storm, while also maintaining summer programming, launching
23 Uproar, and recovering from flood damage to the Eno Mill. She applauded the commission for
24 their efforts.
25 Commissioner Carter echoed Commissioner Greene's remarks.
26 Chair Hamilton thanked the Arts Commission for their work.
27
28 2. Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 — Board Request for Additional Information
29 The Board received a follow-up presentation in a series as response to the Board's request for
30 additional background information for the Land Use Plan 2050 process.
31
32 BACKGROUND: The original Fact Book (February 2024) was prepared by Clarion Associates
33 and posted to the project specific website it maintains as part of the contractual scope with Orange
34 County.
35
36 The original Fact book as well as the updated (February 2026) version can be found via the
37 "Resources" tab of the project website, listed under "Project Resources and Documents":
38 https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com/resources
39
40 The Fact Book:
41 • Provides data on existing conditions and projected future trends to provide a common
42 understanding of Orange County at the start of this Land Use Plan 2050 process.
43 • Serves as a resource as the plan is being developed. New data continually becomes
44 available, such as new Census data and updated development features maintained by the
45 County's GIS staff. This Fact Book freezes the data at a moment in time and is a useful
46 snapshot of County conditions today to help inform development of the plan.
47 • Is not intended to be an encyclopedia of every data point about Orange County.
48
49 The Fact Book Update:
50 0 41 of the 137 total pages/slides have been updated by Planning staff.
6
1 . In late-January 2026, the US Census Bureau released five-year American Community
2 Survey (ACS)estimates, and where applicable, the Fact Book has been updated to reflect
3 the newly released data.
4 • The 2022 ACS data (derived from 2018— 2022 sample data) included in the original Fact
5 Book has been replaced with 2024 ACS data (derived from 2020-2024 sample data).
6 • Data collected by the Planning Department, on annexation and building permit issuance,
7 have also been incorporated into the update.
8
9 The PowerPoint presentation (Attachment A) represents a sampling of information contained
10 in the updated Fact Book, as well as housing data that is not part of the Fact Book update.
11 The slides in the presentation have been selected by staff based on their understanding of
12 some of the Board's areas of interest, as conveyed during its previous work session
13 discussions. The following is a summary of some minor changes or differences between the
14 updated data contained in the presentation and that contained in the original Fact Book:
15
16 Slide 1 —Added date of update, February 2026.
17 Slide 2 — Included 2019 American Community Survey data for comparison to 2024 data.
18 Slide 3—Between 2022—2024, Orange County's total population increased by 5,049 persons.
19 The population of the unincorporated portion of the County increased by 1,207
20 people.
21 Slide 4— No change.
22 Slide 5 — The Center for Disease Control Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) map was updated
23 with 2022 data.
24 Slide 6—480 additional acres were annexed between 2023-2025; 112- acres by Hillsborough
25 and 368-acres by Mebane.
26 Slide 7 — 609 additional certificates of occupancy were issued by Orange County between
27 2024-2025; 568 for residential properties and 41 for commercial properties.
28 Slide 8—Between 2022—2024, the County's total number of housing units increased by 2,544
29 units, from 60,314 total units to 62,858.
30 Slide 9 —The Housing Cost Burden for Orange County Homeowners was updated with 2024
31 data. There was no appreciable change.
32 Slide 10—The Housing Cost Burden for Orange County Renters was updated with 2024 data.
33 There was no appreciable change.
34
35 Housing Data: Separate from the data updates to the Fact Book, but relevant to the discussions
36 regarding growth and land use patterns in the county, staff is providing data and analysis of
37 residential development activity in Orange County. In Fall 2025, the Board requested information
38 about residential construction activity throughout Orange County, particularly how many
39 residential units had been approved but were not yet built or occupied. The Board was interested
40 in how the county as a whole is responding to the housing needs established in three different
41 studies done on behalf of the Town of Chapel Hill in 2021 ("Projected Housing Needs 2020 —
42 2040"), the NC Chamber Foundation in 2024 ("Housing Supply Gap Analysis"), and the Triangle
43 Community Foundation in 2025 ("Orange County, North Carolina Affordable Housing Market
44 Data").
45
46 In response to this request, staff reviewed building activity in unincorporated Orange County and
47 informally surveyed the Planning departments of the municipalities in Orange County. This work
48 was done in January 2026, and captures the status of building activity throughout the entire county
49 for 2025. It was updated to include the Chapel Hill conditional zoning approvals at their February
50 25 meeting. Table 1 shows the results of the survey for Approved but Unbuilt Residential Units in
7
1 Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Hillsborough, Mebane, and Unincorporated Orange County, respectively,
2 by housing type.
3
4 Table 1
Approved Units Not Totals Carrboro Chapel Hillsborough Mebane Orange
Yet Built Hill County*
Multifamily 4,995 104 4,125 766 0 0
Townhome 1,213 409 361 443 0 -
Single-Family 1,307 108 9 79 1,000 111
Total 7,515 212 4,543 1,206 1,443 111
% of Approved Units 2.7% 58.1% 15.4% 18.4% 1.4%
5 *Unincorporated
6
7 Table 2 shows the residential units that are under construction throughout the county that are not
8 yet occupied. These units should all have occupants within the calendar year. Nearly all of this
9 activity is occurring in Chapel Hill and Hillsborough.
10
11 Table 2
Approved Units Under Totals Carrboro Chapel Hillsborough Mebane Orange
Construction Hill County
Multifamily 3,189 2,863 326
Townhome 413 321 92
Single-Family 248 0 237 11
Sub-Total 3,850 0 3,184 655 0 11
12
13 Table 3 aggregates all of this data to summarize the status of approved residential activity
14 throughout Orange County, as of January 2026. The attached presentation provides an analysis
15 of how this residential activity is meeting the county's housing needs but, generally, Chapel Hill,
16 Hillsborough, and Mebane are approving residential projects and construction at larger volumes
17 than historic trends, and appear to meeting the market demand for market-rate multifamily
18 construction, as established by the studies. Single-family residential activity appears to not be
19 meeting the needs of Orange County, as established by the studies. Finally, Chapel Hill and
20 Hillsborough have reported that they have approved 1,062 and 75 affordable units, respectively,
21 that are restricted to eligible households meeting income requirements. As established by the
22 referenced studies, Orange County, as a whole, is not meeting the rental and for-sale housing
23 needs for lower-income households. The attached slides provide more data from the referenced
24 studies and compare the survey data to the studies and their respective conclusions.
25
26 Table 3
Approved Residential Totals Carrboro Chapel Hillsborough Mebane Orange
Units Hill County
Multifamily 8,184 104 6,988 1,092 0 0
Townhome 1,626 0 730 453 443 0
Single-Family 1,555 108 9 316 1,000 122
TOTAL 11,365 212 7,727 1,861 1,443 122
8
% of All Approved 1.9% 68.0% 16.4% 12.7% 1.1%
Total Units
% of 2024 County 14.0% 40.2% 6.7% 2.7% 36.3%
Population
1
2 Next Steps: A third BOCC retreat has been scheduled for Saturday, March 21 for the Board to
3 continue receiving background information. Following the conclusion of presentations, the BOCC
4 has been asked by Clarion Associates and Planning staff to identify any changes to the
5 preliminary draft Land Use Plan 2050 that may be needed prior to its release for public review
6 during Community Engagement Window (CEW) #3. CEW #3 was scheduled to occur between
7 May- July of 2025. The last public engagement meeting held for the LUP 2050 project occurred,
8 during CEW#2, on October 15, 2024.
9
10 Contract Amendment #4 will need to be prepared and approved by the BOCC prior to Clarion's
11 initiation of any work editing the preliminary draft LUP 2050, scheduling engagement meetings,
12 preparing engagement materials, and coordinating with County staff for public notice prior to the
13 launch of engagement.
14
15 Additional information about the project, including e-mail sign-up for project updates, are available
16 on the project website: https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com.
17
18 Completed project deliverables, including Fact Books; outreach summaries; and more, are also
19 available on the project website: https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com/resources
20
21 Why does Orange County Need to Update its Land Use Plan? - In North Carolina, local
22 governments that apply "...zoning regulations... shall adopt and reasonably maintain a
23 comprehensive plan or land-use plan (G.S. 160D-501(a)). This statute requires that zoning
24 regulations are "in accordance with a comprehensive plan" and requires that local governments
25 make statements of consistency when making rezoning decisions on a development application.
26 The existing Orange County Comprehensive Plan was adopted in November 2008.
27
28 Tom Altieri, Senior Planner for Long Range Planning, introduced the item and made the
29 following presentation:
30
31 Slide #1
�, et
•
32 CLARION
9
1 Slide #2
Age of Orange County's Total Population
Population 2019 Population Age Estimated Estimated Percentage
Under 5 years 6,604 6,101 -7,62%
5 to 9 years 8,055 1,612 -5.50%
10 to 14 years 8,614 8,701 1.01%
15 to 19 years 13,943 15,847 13.66%
20 to 24 years 17,594 16,984 -3.47%
25 to 34 years 17,957 17,546 -2.29%
35 to 44 years 16,674 17,073 2.39%
45 to 54 years 18,481 18,231 -1,35%
55 to 59 years 8,612 8,897 3.31%
60 to 64 years 8,899 8,589 -3.48%
65 to 74 years 12,411 14,848 19.64%
75 to 84 years 5,053 7,297 44.41%
85 years and over 1,939 1,952 0.67%
Total Population 144,836 149,678 3.34%
2 Data Source:American Community Survey 2019(2015-2019 5-year)Estimates,American Community Survey 2024(2020-2024 5-year)Estimates
3 Tom Altieri reviewed the updated data tables.
4
5 Slide #3
Orange County"s Population Distribution
This table shows Orange _
County's population by
jurisdiction and the
Chapel Hill** 61,827 40.2%
percentage of Orange Unincorporated County* 55,786 36.3%
County's total population. Carrboro 21,494 14.0%
Hillsborough 10,334 6.7%
About 40% of Orange Mebane** 4,169 2.7%
County's population lives Durham** 146 0.1%
in Chapel Hill, followed Total 153,756 100.0%
by approximately 36% *Unincorporated Orange County means the areas in Orange
who live in County but outside of municipalities,including Carrboro,
unincorporated Orange Chapel Hill, Durham, Hillsborough,and Mebane.This includes
County. the extraterritorial jurisdictions(ETJ)of the towns.
**Portion within Orange County geographic limits
Data Source:CSBM State Demographer,207.4 Certified Population Estimates
6
7
8
10
1 Slide #4
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) Social Vulnerability Index
The CDC Social Vulnerability Racial and Ethnic Minority
Index (CDC SVI) can be used Socioeconomic Status Status
to examine the social Below 150%Poverty Hispanic or Latino(of any race)
vulnerability of Orange County Housing Cost Burden Black or African American*
using 16 factors from No High School Diploma Asian*
4 keythemes. No Health Insurance Native Hawaiian or Pacific
Unemployed Islander*
Two or more Races*
Housing Type and Other Races*
Census tracts are ranked by Transportation *NotHrspanrcorLatino
percentile social vulnerability, Multi-Unit Structures
with 0% being the least Mobile Homes Household Characteristics
vulnerable and 100% being the Crowding(more people than
rooms in a home) Aged 65&Older
most vulnerable. No Vehicle Aged 17&Younger
Group Quarters{e.g.,college Single-Parent Households
dormitories,nursing homes, English Language Proficiency
correctional institutions)
2 LX
3
4 Slide #5
CDC SVI: overall
• Across all factors, census
tracts in the northwest
portion of the County F17
j nlEn nE 6
and along 1-85 are
ranked with the highest
vulnerability.
• Other areas include
outside Carrboro and rr, CDC Sans1 VNn bi I"
Index,overan(zazzt
south of 1-40.
a
r6-1009c Imp4Nl
Wnitlpe,P�nmp
Data Source:Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
5LX Social Vulnerability Index
6
7
11
1 Slide #6
Annexations �� z
s.
• 3,551 acres have been
annexed since 2004.
• 421 acres have been annexed
by Chapel Hill.
• 209 acres have been annexed ° T �" HI CH '
by Carrboro. =*
• 1,039 acres have been annexed
by Hillsborough.
• 1,858 acres have been annexed
by Mebane. 3
• 24 acres have been annexed by KI Hill An—k"s
Durham.
� mds
Park Laid eN 0-5—
Mreadms
�20U42009
r �1tra0-36a9
2 ® NI
3
4
5 Slide #7
Building Permits
p
• 2,681 certificates of
occupancy have been r
�
issued by Orange County
since 2017.
• 2,464 for residential °
�.a
properties (yellow dots on
the map)
• 217 for commercial
properties (red dots on the gAbIng Penrft 20L7to
2025
map)
7
8
12
1 Slide #8
Housing Units Orange County Housing Unit Breakdown
Mebane Durham
Hillsborough 1,503 (2%) 27(0.04%J
• There are a total of 4.522(7%)�
62,858 housing units
in Orange County. Carrborc
10189(16%� Chapel Hill
• The greatest number _22,171(35%)
of housing units are
located in
unincorporated
Orange County,
followed by Chapel
Hill.
Unincorporated'
Orange County
24,446(39%J
2 Data Source:American Community survey 2024(2020-2024 S-yearl Estimates
3
4 Slide#9
Housing Cost Burden
for Homeowners m°
• Based on Census data,
this map shows monthly
owner costs as a
syry'�;t� G ..y,ni LlsaoP=ourc�x
percentage of household
income. Housing Cost en for
Homeowners::Sel Selected
Moldy Owner Costs as
•
Housing cost burden is a�rh.nmy
.. ����- Household Inwme
.� po�a�camr
defined as spending °
more than 30% of
reaaM mare a30Mof
MIYL�Iyn'{
income on housing costs.
>as
Data Source:American Community Survey 2024 12020.2024 S-year]Estimates
5
6
7
13
1 Slide #10
Housing Cost Burden
for Renters F�
• Based on Census data, this
map shows gross rent as a
percentage of household
x�iRrl H
income.
• The darker orange areas
� Housing Cast 6urzlen Ior
Renbe
identify census tracts where Grass ReM as a
Percentage of Household
Income
more renters may be cost Mo °�M�niowl fdnmg
burdened.
��d �reM�s
oo.�s
(�raor w
�aaei.m
psis m
Data Source:American Community Survey 2024(2020-2D24 5-year)Estimates
2
3 Tom Altieri reviewed the schedule for the comprehensive land use plan development.
4 Cy Stober, Planning Director, continued the presentation:
5
6 Slide #11
The following slides are not included
in the Fact Book update.
•
Current Status of Orang
County Housing Supply
& Attainability
8
9
14
1 Slide #12
Housing Availability in Orange County
January 2026 Survey of County & Municipal Planning Departments:
• 11,365 new residential units approved on plans in Orange County
• Does NOT include residences that have been approved and finalized in recent years
• 3,850 Units Under Construction, mostly in Chapel Hill and Hillsborough
• 3,189 Multifamily Units
• 413 Townhomes
• 248 Single-Family Homes
• 7,515 Approved but Unbuilt Residential Units
• 4,995 Multifamily Units
• 1,213 Townhomes
1,307 Single-Family Homes
k • 137 units (11%) are restricted as "affordable"
2
3 Cy Stober said staff were asked to review three different assessments of housing needs
4 in Orange County by three different interest groups and three different studies using three different
5 sets of methodologies. He said they were asked to get an idea of where the county is in meeting
6 housing needs. He said he surveyed the county's municipal planning departments. He said there
7 can be paper approvals that don't result in financing, but that doesn't happen that often in Orange
8 County.
9 Commissioner McKee asked what the definition is for"affordable."
10 Cy Stober said it varies between approvals. He said some approvals were for 80% AMI,
11 and some were for 50% AMI. He said they were not talking about HUD or federal definitions for
12 affordability.
13 Commissioner McKee said he would like a better understanding and conversation on what
14 is affordable in Orange County.
15 Commissioner Greene said it is specific to the development and what is negotiated. She
16 said the important word to her is "restricted," which means that the units are kept affordable for
17 longer than HUD requires.
18 Commissioner McKee said he'd like to see the Board define affordable housing for Orange
19 County.
20
21
15
1 Slide #13
Housing Availability in Orange County:
Town of Chapel Hill Study
Staff Compared Survey Results to Housing Analysis From
• Chapel Hill's 2021 "Projected Housing Needs 2020— 2040" Study, as prepared
by Business Street
• Anticipates Growth of 2% in Town Chapel Hill
• Fact Book anticipates linear annual growth rate of 1% throughout Orange
County, except for Mebane, based upon US Census data
Jurisdiction 2017 2040 2017 2024 2040 Annual
Population Population Households Households Households Growth Rate
Chapel Hill 65,529 83,235 20,869 NIA 31,074 2%
Chapel Hill—
Fa Book 70,554 NIA 27,856 NIA 5%
2
3
4 Slide #14
Housing Availability in Orange County: NC
Chamber Foundation Study
Staff Compared Survey Results to Housing Analysis From
• NC Chamber Foundation's 2024"Housing Supply Gap Analysis",as analyzed by Bowen
National Research
• The analysis is statewide but provides a Housing Supply Gap Analysis for each county.For
Orange County,the study identified a 2029 need for
• 7,557 new rental units,4,467 of which need to be"affordable"(defined as<80%of the Area Median Income)
• 6,312 new for-sale home,305 of which need to be"affordable"
• Assuming that all multifamily units and one-third of townhomes units will be rentals,the
recent survey identifies that Orange County is providing:
• 8,726 new rental units
2,639 new for-sale homes
752 units are restricted as"affordable"
5 m
6
7
16
1 Slide #15
Housing Availability in Orange County:
Triangle Community Foundation Study
Staff Compared Survey Results to Housing Analysis From
• Triangle Community Foundation's 2025 "Orange County, North Carolina Affordable Housing Market Data",
as analyzed by Balance Community Advisors
• The analysis is derived from a regional "snapshot"of Housing Affordability focusing on cost burdened
households and availability of housing types and stock at all price points.
• For Orange County, the study identified a 2025 need for
9,555 units(new and existing)for"low-income" residents(defined as<SO%of the Area Median Income)
17%of homeowners,and 64%of low-income homeowners,are"cost-burdened"
45%of renters,and 71%of low-income renters,are"cost-burdened"
Assuming that all multifamily units and one-third of townhomes units will be rentals, the recent survey
identifies that Orange County is providing:
8,726 new rental units
2,639 new for-sale homes
752 units are restricted as"affordable"
2
3 Cy Stober said based on the study in slide#15, the county is meeting the rental demands,
4 but not the for-sale needs. He said the county would be meeting the for-sale affordable need, but
5 the not the rental affordable need.
6 Vice-Chair Fowler said "9,555 new and existing units" was confusing.
7 Cy Stober said they need 9,555 at an affordable price point.
8 Vice-Chair Fowler asked how many units in that category already exist.
9 Chair Hamilton said it's the figure needed given the population that is low-income.
10 Vice-Chair Fowler said she would like to know how many new ones are needed.
11 Cy Stober said 9,555 is needed, whether it is new or an existing home that is donated to
12 a land trust or to a home trust and kept secure at an affordable price.
13
14
17
1 Slide #16
Approved Residential Plans & Permits,
Orange County, February 2026
2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
zoos . . - ' ■
Carrbara Chapel Hill Hillsborough Mebane Orange County
L ■Multifamily 104 fi 988 1,092 0 Townh
Townhome 0 730 453 443 0
Ingle-Family 108 9 316 1,000 122 m
2 As reported on this graph,'Orange County'represents the planning jurisdiction of unincorporated Orange County
3
4 Slide #17
Approved Residential Units Not Yet Built in
Orange County, February 2026
Approved Residential Plans &Permits
1,443,13%
1,861,15% '
■Carrbara ■Chapel Hill .Hillsborough .Mebane ■Orange County m
5 As reported on these charts,'Orange County"represents the planning jurisdiction of unincorporated Orange County
L
7
18
1 Slide #18
Approved Residential Units Not Yet Built in
Orange County, February 2026
Approved Residential Units Not Yet Built Approved Residential Plans &Permits
111,2%� 212,3% 122,1%, �212.2%
,r
IA43,19%
1,206,16%
■ pro ■Chapel Hill •Hillsborough •Mebane ■Orange County
■Carrbvry ■Chapel Hill .Hillsbvrpugh •Mebane ■Orange County
2 As reported on these chaffs,`Orange County'represents the planning jurisdiction of unincorporated Orange county
3
4 Commissioner Carter referred to slide #14. She noted that the county is nowhere near
5 meeting the affordable housing need in the county when looking at all the studies.
6 Cy Stober provided a caveat that based on a recent approval by Chapel Hill, 1,100 units
7 are restricted as affordable.
8 Commissioner Greene said that Carrboro is currently revising their UDO. She said that a
9 Carrboro council member said that they are planning to position the town to build more housing
10 in the next few years.
11 Vice-Chair Fowler asked if it would be multi-family.
12 Commissioner Greene said that's yet to be determined.
13 Chair Hamilton said this is timely information given the retreat planned for March 215t. She
14 noted that housing affordability has been an issue in the county since she moved here in 2001.
15 Commissioner Bedford said she is thinking of going back through the draft land use plan
16 and reviewing the suggested revisions again. She asked if staff was going to go back through
17 the plan or if they needed the commissioners to do some homework.
18 Tom Altieri said they would like to hear from the Board if there is anything in the document
19 that is off-base and should be removed. He said there may be aspects where the Board isn't
20 sure, and they'd like more information from the public. He gave an example of rural conservation
21 neighborhoods where the Board might like more feedback.
22 Commissioner McKee asked if there is an estimated cost to the county for providing
23 affordable housing.
24 Cy Stober said that is difficult to determine due to changing federal funding levels.
25 Commissioner McKee said that is something the Board will have to reconcile in the future.
26
27
19
1 3. Adult Care Home and Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointments
2 Discussion
3 The Board discussed appointments to the Adult Care Home and Nursing Home Community
4 Advisory Committee.
5
6 BACKGROUND: The Adult Care Home and Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee
7 works to maintain the intent of the Adult Care Home and Nursing Home Residents' Bills of Rights
8 and promote community involvement and cooperation with these homes to ensure quality care
9 for older and disabled adults.
10
11 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all fourteen (14) members.
12
13 REMINDER: As of July 1, 2017, House Bill 248 was adopted by the North Carolina General
14 Assembly regarding the training period for pending members of the"Adult Care Home Community
15 Advisory Committee and Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee". Applicants will be
16 selected from the County "Applicant Interest List" for a condensed training and, if the applicant
17 successfully completes the training, they would be recommended for appointment. Therefore,
18 when an applicant is recommended for appointment, it would initially be for a one-year preliminary
19 term and the training will have already been completed.
20
21 Both members recommended for reappointment have completed their one-year preliminary
22 terms.
23
24 The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration:
25
NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION
DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE
TERM
Sandra Okeke At-Large Partial term 09/30/2026
Bates reappointment
Alicia Reid At-Large Partial term 09/30/2027
(reappointment)
26
27 SPECIAL NOTATION: None of the other applicants have completed the mandatory pre-
28 appointment training and are therefore not eligible for appointment at this time.
29
30 If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancies remain:
31
POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION
DESCRIPTION DATE
Adult Care Home 09/30/2028 Vacant since 11/02/2023
Administrator
Nominee
Adult Care Home 09/30/2026 Vacant since 11/02/2023
Administrator
Nominee
Nursing Home 09/30/2027 Vacant since 11/02/2023
Administrator
Nominee
20
Nursing Home 09/30/2028 Vacant since 11/02/2023
Administrator
Nominee
1
2 Tara May introduced the item.
3 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individuals.
4 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked about the attendance of the recommended individuals.
5 Tara May said that the individuals missed two out of three possible meetings, but they are
6 also performing a lot of work outside of the meetings.
7 Vice-Chair Fowler and Commissioner McKee said they are supportive of the individuals.
8 Commissioner Carter asked if there should be a formal attendance policy exemption for
9 this board.
10 Chair Hamilton said they should discuss this further.
11 Tara May said she would research the work of this board and send it to the Board of
12 Commissioners.
13
14 4. Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool —Appointments Discussion
15 The Board will discuss appointments to the Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool.
16
17 BACKGROUND: The Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool hears appeals from violations of the
18 Orange County Code of Ordinances, protects the health, safety and welfare of Orange County
19 residents and the animals residing in Orange County, and conducts fair and impartial hearings of
20 appeals of potentially dangerous dog declaration and any other appeals as may be required by
21 the Animal Control Ordinance.
22
23 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all eighteen (18) members, with representatives
24 from various related fields and geographic locations in the county.
25
26 Since the work of this body is dependent on hearings, it does not submit an Annual Work Plan.
27
28 The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration:
29
NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION
DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE
TERM
James Wheeler Public Health Field First Full Term 03/31/2029
(reappointment)
Michael At-Large First Full Term 03/31/2029
Dempsey Unincorporated (reappointment)
Count
Dawn Roberts Animal Services Second Full Term 03/31/2029
Advisory Board
Member
BOCC Town of Chapel Hill First Full Term 03/31/2029
Appointment
BOCC At-Large First Full Term 03/31/2029
Appointment
30
31 If the positions listed above are filled, the following vacancies remain:
32
21
POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION
DESIGNATION DATE
Town of Carrboro 03/31/2029 Vacant since 03/31/2023
Town of Carrboro 03/31/2029 Vacant since 09/17/2025
Town of 03/31/2028 Vacant since 03/31/2022
Hillsborough
1
2 Tara May introduced the item.
3 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individuals.
4 Commissioner Bedford nominated Ellen Pearsall for the Town of Chapel Hill position.
5 Chair Hamilton nominated Judith Markey for the At-Large position.
6 The Board agreed by consensus to Ellen Pearsall and Judith Markey.
7
8 5. Arts Commission —Appointments Discussion
9 The Board discussed appointments to the Arts Commission.
10
11 BACKGROUND: The Arts Commission recommends strategies to promote the artistic and
12 cultural growth of Orange County, advises the Board of County Commissioners on matters
13 involving the arts, and acts as the granting panel for funding programs available to individual
14 artists and non-profit groups sponsoring arts projects in Orange County.
15
16 The Board of County Commissioners appoints fourteen (14)At-Large members and one (1) UNC
17 Student who serves a one-year term.
18
19 The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration:
20
NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION
DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE
TERM
Bren West At-Large First Full Term 09/30/2028
Mary Carter At-Large First Full Term 03/31/2028
Taub
Francesca At-Large First Full Term 03/31/2029
Talenti (reappointment)
Denise Duff At-Large Second Full Term 03/31/2029
Gideon Young At-Large Second Full Term 03/31/2029
21
22 If the individuals listed above are appointed, no vacancies remain.
23
24 Tara May introduced the item.
25 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Bren West and Mary Carter Taub.
26 Commissioner Bedford wanted to reappoint Francesca Talenti and Denise Duffy. She
27 said Gideon Young did not meet the attendance requirements and she did not want to reappoint.
28 Commissioner Greene said she supported Gideon Young. Commissioner McKee and
29 Vice-Chair Fowler also supported Gideon Young.
30 Commissioner Carter, Commissioner Bedford, Commissioner Portie-Ascott, and Chair
31 Hamilton were not supportive of Gideon Young.
32 Commissioner Bedford suggested Pascal Moore for the At-Large position.
33 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Francesca Talenti, Denise Duffy, and Pascal
34 Moore for At-Large positions.
22
1 6. Board of Equalization and Review—Appointments Discussion
2 The Board discussed appointments to the Board of Equalization and Review.
3
4 BACKGROUND: The Board of Equalization and Review is a quasi-judicial body that hears
5 appeals from residents concerning various property tax issues, including valuation and exemption
6 appeals. The Board of Equalization and Review is charged with ensuring that all taxable property
7 is appraised and assessed according to the standards required by the North Carolina General
8 Statutes.
9
10 The Board of County Commissioners appoints three (3) members, seven (7) alternates, and
11 designates the Chair.
12
13 Appointees serve two-year terms, but there is no limit to the number of terms they may serve.
14
15 Since the work of this body is dependent on hearings, it has not historically submitted an Annual
16 Work Plan.
17
18 The Board of Equalization and Review does not make recommendations for appointments.
19
20 The following positions are presented for Board consideration:
21
NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION
DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE
TERM
BOCC Alternate Partial Term 03/31/2027
Appointee
BOCC Alternate Partial Term 03/31/2027
Appointee
22
23 If the positions listed above are filled, no vacancies remain.
24
25 Tara May introduced the item.
26 Commissioner McKee recommended Annette Moore. Chair Hamilton, Vice-Chair Fowler,
27 Commissioner Bedford, Commissioner Carter, Commissioner Portie-Ascott, and Commissioner
28 Greene were not in support of the recommendation.
29 Commissioner Carter recommended Elizabeth Young. Chair Hamilton, Vice-Chair
30 Fowler, Commissioner Bedford, Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Portie-Ascott, and
31 Commissioner Greene supported the recommendation.
32 Commissioner Bedford recommended Patrick Mulkey. Chair Hamilton, Vice-Chair Fowler,
33 Commissioner Carter, Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Portie-Ascott, and Commissioner
34 Greene supported the recommendation.
35 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Elizabeth Young and Patrick Mulkey.
36
37 7. Historic Preservation Commission —Appointment Discussion
38 The Board discussed an appointment to the Historic Preservation Commission.
39
40 BACKGROUND: The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is charged with undertaking an
41 inventory of properties of historical, prehistorical, architectural, and/or cultural significance. It
42 recommends areas to be designated or removed as "historic districts" and reviews and acts upon
43 proposals for alterations, demolition, new construction, etc.
44
23
1 In considering new applicants, the HPC is required to follow the guidelines from the State Historic
2 Preservation Office (SHPO) in order for the County to remain eligible to participate in the state's
3 Certified Local Government (CLG) program. Those guidelines include the following language
4 governing the qualifications of prospective HPC applicants:
5 "All members shall have demonstrated experience or knowledge in history, architecture or
6 related disciplines that is supported by resume information sufficient to allow the SHPO to
7 confirm the qualifications of members, pursuant to 36 CFR Part 61."
8
9 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all seven (7)At-Large members.
10
11 The following individual is recommended for Board consideration:
12
NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION
DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE
TERM
Carol Ann At-Large First Full Term 03/31/2029
Lewald reappointment
13
14 If the individual listed above is appointed, no vacancies remain.
15
16 Tara May introduced the item.
17 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individual.
18
19 8. Orange County Board of Adjustment—Appointments Discussion
20 The Board discussed appointments to the Orange County Board of Adjustment.
21
22 BACKGROUND: The Board of Adjustment hears, reviews, decides appeals, and reviews any
23 order requirement, decision, or determination made by the Zoning Officer in the performance of
24 official duties. It also hears and decides applications for the approval of those Special Uses
25 requiring Board of Adjustment approval, in accordance with the rules and conditions laid down in
26 the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), hears and decides appeals for variances from the
27 dimensional regulations of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), and decides or determines
28 other matters as may be required by the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) or State law.
29 There are no term limits for Board of Adjustment members.
30
31 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all five (5) members and two (2) alternates.
32
33 The Board of Adjustment does not make recommendations for appointments.
34
35 The following individuals are presented for Board consideration:
36
NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION
DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE
TERM
Jeff Scott At-Large Third Full Term 06/30/2029
Elizabeth At-Large Second Full Term 06/30/2029
Bronson
37
38 If the individuals listed above are appointed, no vacancies remain.
24
1 Tara May introduced the item.
2 Commissioner Bedford said that Elizabeth Bronson is also on the Planning Board and that
3 the Board did not want to have the same individuals on both boards. She recommended Jeff
4 Scott and Leto Copeley.
5 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Jeff Scott.
6 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said that Leto Copeley is not interested in the position.
7 The Board agreed to keep re-advertising for the At-Large position currently held by
8 Elizabeth Bronson.
9
10 9. Parks and Recreation Council —Appointments Discussion
11 The Board discussed appointments to the Parks and Recreation Council.
12
13 BACKGROUND: The Parks and Recreation Council consults with and advises the Department
14 of Environment, Agriculture, Parks, and Recreation, and the Board of County Commissioners on
15 matters affecting parks planning, development, and operation, recreation facilities, policies, and
16 programs, and public trails and open space.
17
18 The Board of County Commissioners appoints twelve (12) members, with representatives from
19 each of the County's townships and municipalities, and two (2) non-voting youth delegates.
20
21 The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration:
22
NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION
DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE
TERM
Louise Flinn Bingham Township Second Full Term 03/31/2029
Navya Sharma Youth Delegate (non- First Full Term 03/31/2029
voting) rea ointment
23
24 If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancies remain:
25
POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION
DESIGNATION DATE
Carrboro City 03/31/2027 Vacant since 08/14/2025
Limits
At-Large 03/31/2028 Vacant since 02/02/2026
Little River 03/31/2026 Vacant since 10/20/2025
Township
26
27 Tara May introduced the item.
28 Commissioner Carter noted Navya Sharma's attendance issues.
29 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if the attendance policy should apply to youth.
30 Tara May said that is up to the Board.
31 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she supported Navya Sharma.
32 Chair Hamilton said that advisory boards now know that the Board will be looking at
33 attendance. She said if they get feedback about barriers to attendance, they can adjust.
34 Commissioner McKee said that staff should remind the youth delegates of the attendance
35 expectations.
36 Laura Jensen said one nuance is that youth delegate positions are non-voting.
37 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individuals.
25
1 Vice-Chair Fowler nominated Marissa Hoer for the At-Large position.
2 Commissioner Bedford agreed with the nomination.
3 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Marissa Hoer.
4
5 10. Orange County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council —Appointment Discussion
6 The Board discussed an appointment to the Orange County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council.
7
8 BACKGROUND: The N.C. Department of Public Safety partners with the Juvenile Crime
9 Prevention Council (JCPC) to galvanize community leaders, locally and statewide, to reduce and
10 prevent juvenile crime. JCPC members are appointed by the Board of County Commissioners
11 (BOCC). Members represent nineteen (19)different fields/organizations, and the BOCC may also
12 appoint up to seven (7) at-large members.
13
14 There is no application process for the Council currently.
15
16 The following individual is presented for Board consideration:
17
NAME POSITION TYPE OF TERM
DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION
TERM DATE
Sanai Bryant A Person Under the Partial Term 06/30/2027
Age of 21
18
19 Tara May introduced the item.
20 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individual.
21 Chair Hamilton said that they are looking forward to having the JCPC board as part of their
22 regular appointment process. She said that she's requested research on quasi-judicial boards
23 and how other counties appoint to those roles.
24 Vice-Chair Fowler asked who has been attempting to fill school, business community, or
25 district attorney designee positions.
26 Tara May said it's been with DSS, but that she will include those positions in her
27 advertising.
28 Vice-Chair Fowler asked if the designee is for both school systems.
29 Tara May said statutes require one.
30 Chair Hamilton said an at-large position could used for the other school system.
31
32 Adjournment
33
34 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Bedford to
35 adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m.
36
37 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
38
39 Jean Hamilton, Chair
40
41
42 Recorded by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board
43
44 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board
Attachment 3
1
1 DRAFT MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY
3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
4 BUSINESS MEETING
5 March 17, 2026
6 7:00 p.m.
7
8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Tuesday, March 17,
9 2026, at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC.
10
11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT. Chair Jean Hamilton, Vice-Chair Amy Fowler, and
12 Commissioners Jamezetta Bedford, Marilyn Carter, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-
13 Ascott
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT. None.
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
17 Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present.
21
22 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
23 Chair Hamilton read the public charge.
24
25 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
26 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
27 Makeda Ma'at read the following statement:
28 "1 would like to respectfully raise serious concerns about the treatment of residents by several
29 county departments and the management company at the Landings at Winmore. These issues
30 impact vulnerable people who depend on these services for basic needs, housing stability and
31 fair treatment. In the Department of Social Services, residents have encountered hostility,
32 unprofessional attitudes, lack of compassion, and frequent denial of benefits without adequate
33 explanation. The Orange County Housing Authority staff, some of them have shown similar,
34 unprofessional conduct, pure attitudes, and apparent bias in handling of resident affairs or
35 inquiries. The Human Relations Commission staff has removed a participant from the meeting on
36 February 24th, silencing an important voice on rights and inclusion issues. The county's eviction
37 diversion program has provided no meaningful assistance in some cases despite its goal of
38 preventing unnecessary evictions and helping to resolve landlord tenant disputes. In my own
39 situation, for example, for years my bank has mailed my rental check two to three weeks early.
40 Yet, the management company at the Landings at Winmore sometimes claim they never get it
41 and issue a late notice anyway. This is a known mail delivery delay affecting residents in our
42 complex and the broader issue of the LISPS service. The management office at the Lands has
43 created a toxic environment overall with unprofessional interactions that make resolving even
44 basic issues feel hostile and unproductive. These patterns point to systematic problems. I urge
45 you the board to conduct or independent reviews of these departments and the programs. I've
46 already been to one meeting, and I was trying to go to the other one to the board. Strengthening
47 oversight complaint processes, accountability and outreach for housing related services ensure
48 that fair housing laws are actively enforced, including better support for tenants facing unfair
49 landlord practices or disputes no matter who the landlord is, even if it's Community Home Trust,
50 they have to be held accountable. It's not fair to the residents. Many residents feel unheard and
51 unsupported by systems designed to help them addressing these issues would better align."
2
1 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
2 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.)
3
4 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
5 Commissioner Carter deferred to Commissioner Portie-Ascott to give an update on the
6 Greater Chapel Hill Chamber of Commerce's 2026 Economic Forecast Forum, highlighting
7 Orange County's rankings: fourth in the state for employment growth, fourth for GDP growth, and
8 eleventh for housing permit growth. She said she attended the North Carolina Association of
9 Counties' Health and Human Services steering committee meeting, where she learned about
10 behavioral and mental health innovations. She noted Orange County is implementing many of
11 the same innovative practices mentioned by state officials, including behavioral health urgent care
12 centers and crisis counselor integration with 911 call centers.
13 Commissioner Portie-Ascott noted the passing of Mae McLendon, whose service to the
14 community left a lasting impact. She said she attended the Economic Forecast Forum, where
15 172 businesses surveyed identified housing affordability and supply as the primary factor making
16 hiring difficult. She noted similar themes emerged at the District Nine NCACC meeting and in
17 discussions with the Orange Chatham Association of Realtors, where there was strong interest in
18 the county's emergency housing assistance programs and landlord incentive funds. She said she
19 attended the Affordable Housing Advisory Board along with Commissioners McKee and Carter.
20 She said what is consistent across the meetings is how the lack of housing affects who is able to
21 stay in Orange County.
22 Commissioner Bedford said she attended the DSS Board meeting, and that she's joining
23 the NCACC steering committee on Thursday with the taxation subcommittee.
24 Vice-Chair Fowler said she took the Department of Revenue Board of Equalization and
25 Review training. She said it emphasized the importance of consistency in how appellants are
26 treated. She said she received a request to add a National Youth HIV and AIDS Awareness Day
27 proclamation to an agenda before April 10. She highlighted important information about the
28 impact of HIV and AIDS on youth ages 13 to 24. She noted two important proclamations on the
29 consent agenda.
30 Commissioner McKee said the following day there will be a meeting in Raleigh on property
31 tax reduction and reform that he plans to listen to. He said that legislative leaders may release
32 draft legislation relating to property tax changes.
33 Commissioner Greene said she attended the Housing Collaborative group and
34 representatives from all four jurisdictions agreed to discuss affordable housing. She said she
35 wanted to better understand what each jurisdiction is doing and how the different housing groups
36 work together. She said she sent a memo to the commissioners on information and data for
37 providing affordable housing.
38 Commissioner McKee requested that the County Attorney follow up on the comments
39 made by Makeda Ma'at.
40 Chair Hamilton paid tribute to Mae McLendon and her work for the people in Orange
41 County. She said she attended the funeral of Master Trooper Perry of the NC Highway Patrol.
42 She said the service was a reminder of the dedication of first responders. She noted important
43 items on the consent agenda. She said she attended the Advisory Council on Aging where they
44 had a presentation on adult protective services and the role they play in improving the welfare of
45 older adults.
46
47
3
1 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/Special Presentations
2 a. Child Abuse Prevention Month Proclamation
3 The Board approved a proclamation declaring April 2026 as Child Abuse Prevention Month.
4
5 BACKGROUND: April is National Child Abuse Prevention Month. The Department of Social
6 Services and other community organizations are concerned about the continued incidence of child
7 abuse and neglect in Orange County and in the State of North Carolina. In fiscal year 2024-2025,
8 526 reports of suspected child maltreatment were assessed in Orange County. For the State of
9 North Carolina, there were 57,750 reports assessed within the same period. Currently, 80 children
10 are in the custody of Orange County Social Services due to serious abuse and neglect issues
11 within their families. In December 2025, there were 11,181 children in custody of social services
12 across the state.
13
14 Most child abuse and neglect issues reported to Social Services involve substance use, domestic
15 violence, unsafe discipline, supervision, or care of children. Social Services is working to increase
16 education and awareness of these issues and to try to find strategies to improve the safety of
17 children in the community.
18
19 Community members can make a difference in the life of a child by making connections. Lending
20 a helping hand or listening ear to a parenting neighbor or friend can help alleviate stress and
21 provide a positive impact on a child's life. Increasing social connection and providing concrete
22 support are integral protective factors.
23
24 Parents, grandparents, and family members can ensure children are safe in their care by properly
25 securing firearms and ensuring all medications or potentially harmful substances are inaccessible
26 to children.
27
28 Everyone is encouraged to Wear Blue on Friday, April 10, 2026 in recognition of Child Abuse
29 Prevention Month. Social Services is planning to provide awareness materials to community
30 members at the Sportsplex Family Fun Day on April 11, 2026.
31
32 The Board of Commissioners is asked to support this effort and to encourage the community to
33 become more aware of the issues impacting children and families.
34
35 Brittany Mann, Program Manager, introduced the item and reviewed the background
36 information.
37
38 Commissioners read the following proclamation in turn:
39
40 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
41 PROCLAMATION
42 CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH
43 April 2026
44
45 WHEREAS, child abuse and neglect is a serious problem affecting every segment of our
46 community, and finding solutions requires input and action from everyone; and
47
48 WHEREAS, in fiscal year 2024-2025, 526 reports of suspected child maltreatment were assessed
49 by child protective services in Orange County; and
50
4
1 WHEREAS, child abuse can have long-term psychological, emotional, and physical effects that
2 have lasting consequences for victims of abuse; and
3
4 WHEREAS, children who are loved and nurtured grow up to be healthy, creative, and productive
5 community members; and
6
7 WHEREAS, it is the goal of Orange County to improve the quality of life of all children who live
8 here; and
9
10 WHEREAS, we acknowledge that we must work together as a community to increase awareness
11 about child abuse and contribute to promote the social and emotional well-being of children and
12 families in a safe, stable, and nurturing environment;
13
14 NOW, THEREFORE do we, the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County, North
15 Carolina, hereby proclaim April 2026 as "Child Abuse Prevention Month" and call upon all
16 residents to join together to prevent child abuse.
17
18 THIS IS THE 17th DAY OF MARCH, 2026.
19
20
21
22 Jean Hamilton, Chair
23 Orange County Board of Commissioners
24
25 A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to
26 approve and authorize the Chair to sign the proclamation declaring April 2026 as Child Abuse
27 Prevention Month in Orange County.
28
29 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
30
31 b. Department of Social Services Protective Services Overview Presentation
32 The Board received an overview presentation on protective services, specifically Child Protective
33 Services and Adult Protective Services, from Orange County Department of Social Services'staff.
34
35 BACKGROUND: Protective services in North Carolina includes Child Protective Services and
36 Adult Protective Services and are managed by local county Departments of Social Services with
37 support and supervision provided by the North Carolina Department of Health and Human
38 Services. Child Protective Services investigates abuse, neglect, and dependency of children
39 under age 18, while Adult Protective Services protects disabled adults, age 18 and above, from
40 abuse, neglect, and exploitation. These are mandated services under North Carolina General
41 Statute (NCGS) 7B for Child Protective Services, and NCGS 108A, Article 6 for Adult Protective
42 Services, and are governed by a combination of State and federal law and policy.
43
44 In fiscal year 2024-25, the Orange County Department of Social Services investigated 526 reports
45 of suspected child maltreatment. During the same time, the Department also evaluated 156
46 reports of abuse, neglect or exploitation of disabled adults.
47
48 The Department of Social Services works with community partners and stakeholders to assess
49 and investigate reports and intervenes when appropriate to provide services and safety plans.
50 The attached presentation provides a basic overview of the processes involved with Child
5
1 Protective Services and Adult Protective Services as well as NCGS references and links for more
2 detailed information.
3
4 Lindsey Shewmaker, DSS Director, introduced the item.
5 Brittany Mann made the following presentation:
6
7 Slide #1
Protective Services for Children and Adults:
An Overview
Orange County Department of Social Services
Board of County Commissioners Meeting: March 17,2026
ORANC I'_COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL SERVICES
8
9
10 Slide #2
Protective Services for Children
11
12
13
6
1 Slide #3
Child Protective Services in North Carolina: Statutory Authority
• Child Protective Services in North Carolina is governed by Chapter 7B of the
General Statutes,the Juvenile Code ,which mandates that county
Departments of Social Services protect juveniles from abuse, neglect, and
dependency.
• North Carolina General Statute 713-301 indicates that any person who has
"cause to suspect"a child has been abused, neglected, or is dependent is
required to report this to the Department of Social Services.
• North Carolina General Statute 76-302(a) states when a report of abuse,
neglect, or dependency is received, the director of the department of social
services shall make a prompt and thorough assessment.The Social Services
Director delegates that authority to staff in the Department of Social
Services.
3
4 Slide #4
Child Protective Services in North Carolina: Reports
• All reports must meet certain statutory criteria to be screened in for CPS
Assessment:
• Juvenile(age 0-17)
• Alleged perpetrator must be a parent/caretaker(as defined in statute).The only
exception is in cases of Human Trafficking.
• Allegations must meet the statutory definitions of abuse, neglect,or dependency as
defined in G.S.713-101
• If the report is screened out, there is no further action.
• If the report is screened in, there is a response time and response track
assigned based upon the reported allegations.
• Neglect/Dependency Reports—generally 72-hour response time;some may warrant an
immediate or 24-hour response depending on the nature of the allegations and/or ages
of the children.(Family Assessment)
• Abuse Reports—Immediate or 24-hour response time(Investigative Assessment)
5
6
7
Slide #5
Chitd Protective Services in North • Investigations
FAMILY ASSESSMENTS INVESTIGATIVE
Scheduled initial contact ASSESSMENTS
Family-centered approach Unannounced initial contact
Case decision is whetherthe All family members interviewed
family needs Ongoing CPS separately
Servicesto address identified ALL ASSESSMENTS Case decision is to substantiate
concerns Initial&ongoing assessmentof child safety or unsubstantiate maltreatment
(safety plans)
Assessmentof riskforfuture maltreatment
Global assessmentof familystrengths and
needs
Possible need for Child Medical Exams/In-depth
Evaluations
Contact with providers working with the families
Contact with colLaterals{familylfriends)provided
by fa mi ly
Referrals for services to address identified needs
Review of CPS history,criminal history,911 calls
4 Slide #6
Chitd Protective Services in North • In-Home
• ChiLdren remain with their parents when possible and services are provided
to ensure chiLd
• Temporary Safety Providers might be identified to step in and heLp the family.
This is a voluntary plan and requires the parent or caregiver to agree.
• • • include:
Child• &Family Team Meetings
• Development of Agreement
• Referrals for
contact• Regular • service providers
• Goconcerns, '• factors, • increase family
capacityto • • future CPSinvolvement)
8
1 Slide #7
Child Protective Services in North Carolina: Out of Home
Placement (Permanency Planning) and Court Processes
• The primary goal of Child Protective Services is to ensure children are safe
within their own homes.When in home safety cannot be assured, Social
Services takes legal steps to assume child custody.
• Ajuvenile petition is filed, and a Judge will determine if the agency has legal
grounds to remove the child(ren)from the home.
• This initiates the Juvenile Court process and requires a hearing within 7 days.
The family has legal representation and regular court hearings.
• The primary goal is almost always to reunify the family and social workers
continue to work with the parents on steps toward reunification.
3
4 Crystal Wiese,Assistant DSS Director, continued the presentation:
5
6 Slide #8
Protective Services for Adults
8
9
9
1 Slide #9
Adult Protective Services in North Carolina: Statutory Authority
• Adult Protective Services is mandated by North Carolina General Statute
108A, Article 6, Protection of the Abused, Neglected or Exploited Disabled
Adult Act and Article 6A, Protection of Disabled and Older Adults From
Financial Exploitation.
• North Carolina General Statute 108A-102(a) requires that"any person having
reasonable cause to believe that a disabled adult is in need of protective
services shall report such information to the director."
• Any director receiving a report that a disabled adult is in need of protective
services shall make a prompt and thorough evaluation to determine whether
the disabled adult is in need of protective services and what services are
needed. (G.S. 108A-103(a))
2
3
4 Slide #10
Adult Protective Services in North Carolina: Screening Reports
For an Adult Protective Services report to be accepted or"screened in", it must
meet all the following requirements by statute:
1. Is the adult alleged to be disabled?
2. Is the adult alleged to be abused,neglected, or exploited?
3. Is the adult alleged to be in need of protection?
If a report is screened in, the evaluation shall be initiated:
• Immediately if danger of death is alleged.
• Within 24 hours if danger of irreparable harm is alleged.
• Within 72 hours if the complaint does not allege danger of death or irreparable harm.
Following an evaluation, a determination must be made whether the report is
substantiated, meaning all three conditions are met: An adult with a disability
has been abused, neglected, or exploited and is need of protective services.
5
6
7
10
1 Slide #11
Adult Protective Services in North Carolina: Definitions
Disability
•The adult is physically or mentally incapacitated due to an intellectual disability,cerebral palsy,epilepsy or autism;
organic brain damage caused by advanced age or other physicaIdegeneration in connection therewith;or conditions
Incurred at any age which are the result of accident,organic brain damage,mental or physical illness,or continued
consumption or absorption of substances.
Abuse, Neglect, •
•Abuse is the willful infliction of physical pain,injury or mental anguish,unreasonable confinement,or the willful
deprivation by a caretaker of services necessary to maintain mental and physical health.
•Self-Neglect:living alone and not able to provide for themselves the services necessary to maintain their mental or
physical health
•Caretaker Neglect:not receiving services from their caretaker.
•Exploitation is the illegal or improper use of a disabled adult or their resources for another's profit or advantage.Only
prong not limited to self or caretaker.Includes but not limited to financial exploitation.
Need for Protection
•The adult due to his physical or mental incapacity,is unable to perform or obtain for themselves essential services
and the person is without able,responsible,and willing persons to perform or obtain for his essential services.
2
3
4 Slide #12
Adult Protective Services in North Carolina: Services Needed
• If the need for protection is substantiated,the adult's capacity is then
determined for service provision.
• If the adult understands their need for protection, they must consent to
receive protective services. The adult may also choose to refuse protective
services.
• If it is determined that an adult does not have capacityto understand their
need for protection, further actions (such as petitioning the court for an Adult
Protective Services order or Guardianship) is required.
5
6
7
11
1 Slide #13
PROTECTIVECHILD ADULT PROTECTIVE
Duty to Report Duty to Report
Any person who has cause to suspect a child has been abused, ` Any person having reasonable cause to believe that a disabled adult is in
neglected,or is dependent is required)to report this to the Department need of protective services shall report such information to the director.
of Social Services.G.S.78-301 ` G.S.108A-102(a).
Statutory Criteria for Accepted Reports Statutory Criteria for Accepted Reports
• Juvenile(0-17) Disabled adult(18+)
• Alleged perpetrator must be a parent/caretaker(as defined in Must be"in need of protective services"
statute),only exception is Human Trafficking Alleged perpetrator must be a caretaker(as defined in statute),only
• Allegations must meet the statutory definitions of abuse,neglect, exception is exploitation
or dependency as defined in G.S.70-101 Allegations must meet the statutory definitions of abuse.neglect,or
exploitation as defined in G.S.108A-101(m)
Primary Objective Primary Objective
The primarygual isto protect children from abuse,neglect,and The primary goal is to protect disabled adults(aged 18 orolderwith
dependency while preserving the family unit whenever safely possible. mental or physical!n capacities)from abuse,neglect,or exploitation.APS
CPS prioritizes the prevention of unnecessary or inappropriate prioritizes the need for protective services rather than the evaluation of
separation of children and parents,protects the constitutional rights incidents,maximizes self-determination,works with family and support
of parents and children,and seeks safety and permanency within systems,seeks the least least restrictive alternative,and protects
reasonable time periods. confidentiality.
2
3
4 Slide #14
Questions?
Additional Resources
Abuse,Neglect,dependency,and Termination of Parental Rights
https://www.sog.unc.edU/resources/m icrosites/a buse-negLect-dependency-a nd-term ination-
pa rental-rights/chapter-1-overview-north-carotin a-ch ild-welfa re-system
Adult Protective Services Manual
https:/IpoLicies.ncdhhs.gov/wp-content/unloads/Adult-Protective-Services-
Manual September-2025.pddf
Introducing a New Flow Chart for Adult Protective Services Court Proceedings
https://canons.sog.unc.edu/bLog/2025/06/12/introducing-a-new-flow-chart-for-adult- 0 ••
p rote ctive-services-cou rt-proceed i nos/ 91W
14
5
6 Commissioner Carter thanked staff for the presentation and their work.
7 Commissioner Portie-Ascott echoed Commissioner Carter's remarks. She asked if adults
8 in Adult Protective Services are moved out of the home if necessary.
9 Crystal Wiese said the division works with the individual and their caregivers to determine
10 the best course of action.
12
1 Vice-Chair Fowler thanked staff for their work. She said she hoped that the public would
2 hear that staff aren't just there to take people away, but to help connect families to services. She
3 asked what the biggest barriers are for ensuring children and adults with disabilities are safe in
4 and out of the home.
5 Crystal Wiese said it's often access to resources and having health insurance. She said
6 there isn't a lot of funding for adult protective services, and adults who serve as guardians don't
7 have resources to assist in caring for those they have responsibility for.
8 Brittany Mann said housing is a challenge for Child Protective Services. She said some
9 children are non-verbal, and getting information on their needs can be difficult.
10 Commissioner McKee asked how a person is monitored and supervised that may not have
11 the cognitive ability to understand their need for protection.
12 Crystal Wiese said there's a spectrum of options available depending on the needs of the
13 adult.
14 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if Child Protective Services is always able to respond
15 within the time guidelines and if vacancies impact that response time.
16 Brittany Mann said vacancies are not allowed to impact the response time. She said they
17 begin investigating issues as soon as possible to meet the guidelines. She said if a case is
18 initiated in another county, it can affect the response time.
19 Chair Hamilton asked who is on the multidisciplinary team for adult protective services in
20 Orange County.
21 Crystal Wiese said they started theirAdult Protection MDT in 2025. She listed the partners
22 that participate in the MDT. She said they've recently discussed focusing on financial exploitation
23 for older adults. She said they would like to move forward with a new type of multidisciplinary
24 team called a statutory case MDT and will ask the commissioners to approve this in the future.
25 Commissioner Bedford asked Crystal Wiese to explain how children in protective services
26 receiving care at UNC hospital are monitored by DSS.
27 Crystal Wiese said other counties can request a courtesy assist to check on children who
28 are in Orange County. She said that they check on a lot of children at UNC hospital since it has
29 the state children's hospital. She said they can also request courtesy assists for Orange County
30 children who are in other counties.
31
32 5. Public Hearings
33 None.
34
35 6. Regular Agenda
36 a. Appointment of Tax Administrator to Serve as Acting Tax Collector and Acting Tax
37 Assessor
38 The Board approved a resolution appointing John Burgiss as Orange County Tax Administrator,
39 effective April 1, 2026, to serve as Acting Tax Assessor and Acting Tax Collector until such time a
40 permanent Tax Administrator is hired to fill the unexpired term of Nancy Freeman which ends April
41 1, 2027.
42
43 BACKGROUND: By Resolution 2023-018, adopted March 7, 2023 (Item 8-e), the Board of
44 County Commissioners reappointed Nancy Freeman as Tax Assessor and Tax Collector, serving
45 under the title of Tax Administrator, for a four-year term from April 2, 2023 through April 2, 2027.
46
47 Ms. Freeman has announced her retirement effective April 1, 2026. Pursuant to the North Carolina
48 General Statutes (NCGS), the Board is responsible for appointing a qualified individual to fill the
49 unexpired portion of the term. The position of Tax Administrator is a consolidated role combining
50 the statutory duties of County Assessor (NCGS 105-294), and Tax Collector (NCGS 105-349).
51
13
1 Under NCGS 105-294, the Board shall appoint a county assessor who meets statutory
2 qualifications and is certified by the North Carolina Department of Revenue.An appointee serves
3 in an acting capacity until certification is obtained and must meet certification requirements within
4 two years of appointment.
5
6 Under NCGS 105-349 (b), the Board shall appoint as tax collector a person of character and
7 integrity whose experience in business and collection work is satisfactory to the governing body.
8
9 With Board approval of the resolution, Mr. Burgiss would serve until such time a permanent Tax
10 Administrator is hired to fill the unexpired term of Nancy Freeman which ends April 1, 2027.
11
12 Travis Myren, County Manager, made the following presentation:
13
14 Slide #1
Agenda Item:6-a
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Appointment of Acting Tax
Collector and Assessor
March 17, 2026
15
16
17
14
1 Slide #2
Overlapping Projects
2026
a
315-Interim Candidate 411-Nancy Retires
Interviews
Interim Tax 319-Interim Candidate
Administrator Discussion-small Group
3117-Appointment of
Interim Tax Administrator Interim Tax Administra for Appointment
3113-Recruiter Proposal Optional
Due to Human Resources 4121-Board Approves
Recruiter Contract
3124-Small Group Reviews
Tax Recruiter Proposals
Administrator Tlmellne-TBD
Recruitment Position Profile
3130-4110 Small Group Semi-finalists to Board
Interviews Recruiters Board designates
fnalists
• Board interviews
finalists
319126-Tax Assessment 417 or 4121-Full Board
Work Group Presentation Approves Consultant
Contract
Tax 3119126-WarkGroup
Assessment Discussion
Consultant 3120-Vendor-Selection-
W ork Group Commissioners
3120-4/3Contract Timeline-TBD
2 Negotiations
3
4 Slide #3
Acting Appointment
• Current Tax Administrator, Nancy Freeman, retiring April 1, 2026
-Appointment runs through April 2, 2027
• Acting County Assessor
- Appointed until a permanent Tax Administrator is hired to fill the unexpired term of Ms. Freeman
• Candidate Evaluation Process
- Department of Revenue maintains list of former Tax Assessors and Collectors
- Internal candidates also considered
- Four Commissioners involved in different stages of the evaluation process
Chair Hamilton
Vice Chair Fowler
Commissioner Carter
Commissioner McKee
s ORNANG CA OUNTY
5
6
7
15
1 Slide #4
Acting Appointment
Recommend John Burgiss to serves as Acting Tax Collector and Tax Assessor
— Started career Allegany County as appraiser and cartographer in 1992
— Transitioned to Forsyth County in 1994
— Appointed Forsyth County Tax Assessor and Collector in 2011
• Conducted eight Countywide Reappraisals over course of his career
• Maintained a collection rate of more than 99%for the past 10 years in Forsyth County
• Started customer service call center in Forsyth County
• Helped create an automated sales comparison approach within the county's tax system in Forsyth County
ORANGE COUNTY
4 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #5
Manager's Recommendation
Approve and authorize the Chair to sign a resolution appointing John Burgiss,effective
April 1, 2026,to serve as Acting Tax Assessor and Acting Tax Collector under the title of
Tax Administrator until such time a permanent Tax Administrator is hired to fill the
unexpired term of Nancy Freeman which ends on April 1,2027
ORANGE COUNTY
5 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Fowler, to approve
7 the resolution appointing John Burgiss, effective April 1, 2026, to serve as Acting Tax Assessor
8 and Acting Tax Collector, under the title of Tax Administrator, until such as time a permanent Tax
9 Administrator is hired.
10
11 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12
16
1 Chair Hamilton welcomed John Burgiss and noted his expertise and experience.
2 Commissioner Carter thanked Nancy Freeman for her service to the county and welcomed
3 John Burgiss.
4
5 b. Solicitation of Offers — 6823 Millhouse Road
6 The Board discussed a "Solicitation of Offers for Purchase of Real Property for Public Purpose
7 Use, 6823 Millhouse Road."
8
9 BACKGROUND: At the Board's November 11, 2025 work session, staff presented information
10 concerning options for the potential sale of approximately 45 acres of land at 6823 Millhouse Road
11 for the purpose of facilitating a non-profit owned and operated field complex that would include
12 both private and public field play use. This property has previously been referred to as part of the
13 Future Millhouse Road Park and was listed in previous County Capital Investment Plans as such.
14
15 As shown on the overall site map, the total property is 79 acres, with approximately 34 acres to
16 the western and southwestern areas of the site containing natural resource constraints, a Natural
17 Heritage site adjoining Duke Forest, and topographic changes not suitable for a field complex.
18 The Board reviewed this part of the property at the November 11, 2025 work session and
19 determined that only the 45 acres shown on the map of available area should be included in the
20 area for sale. The remaining 34 acres of natural resource land may be retained or conveyed to a
21 conservation partner, pending further discussions.
22
23 Under the North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS), sale of property to a non-profit organization
24 for a public purpose is authorized under NCGS 160A-279(a) and 160A-267.
25
26 At the November 11, 2025 work session, the Board authorized the Manager,Attorney and staff to
27 develop a document to solicit proposals for purchase by a non-profit organization, under the public
28 purpose provisions above, to develop a multi-field complex for soccer and/or other similar field
29 sports, with certain conditions attached:
30
31 • The fields complex will be managed and operated so as to allow both private usage
32 coordinated by the non-profit owner as well as usage for public recreational play, including
33 tournaments and other special events;
34 • The non-profit owner will enter into a Memorandum of Agreement concurrent with the sale
35 of the property regarding the property, expectations of use and other conditions; and
36 • A deed restriction that reverts the land to County ownership if the conditions of usage are
37 not met will be included in the deed of sale;
38
39 Pending Board discussion, the attached Solicitation of Offers could be published on or around
40 March 26, 2026, and proposals (with purchase offers) from qualifying non-profit organizations
41 could be submitted by April 24, 2026. Once proposals are received, relevant information on the
42 proposals will be prepared and presented to the Board to consider terms of a contract to sell and
43 determine a recommended purchaser. Once this is completed, a contract and deed of sale, along
44 with a Memorandum of Agreement between the parties as outlined above, would be prepared for
45 the Board's consideration.
46
47 David Stancil, DEAPR Director, introduced the item. He referred to the following map:
48
49
17
1 Map #1
Millhouse Road Tract-Area for Potential Sale
r,
�t 6_
V
J
j
n LIkP For25t
i
0 C.04 0.09 0.17 Miles Tract Name:Millhouse Road Tract
Legend I I I L I I I I
ORANGE COUNTY Landowner:Orange County
Streets La,35 6
Streams Long:-79'9'G4,86"
Date:2/27/2026
Q Tax Parcel Created Ey:Christian Hirni
Duke Forest Department of Environment, Image:2021 Aerial Imagery
Available Agriculture,Parks&Recreation Acres.78.7(-97 available)
2
3 David Stancil said the 45-acre parcel is part of a 79-acre site owned by the county.
4
5 David Stancil referred to the following map:
6
7
18
1 Map #2
Millhouse Road Park-Natural Resources Map
r
taA
' -
t
III
I
III
S° fllfllflll -
t•.
f
i z
r
Tract Information: o ,ao Sao seo e.o ,azure
Legend
Landowner:Orange County ORANGE COUNTY Roads
Lat:35'58.69"
Long:79'04.86" NaWral Areas
date:0411 1 12025 Streams
Image:2021 Aerial Photo
Created By:Christian Hirni -71 Natural Heritage Areas
Acres:—76.7 0 County Open space
Sensitive Natural Department of Environment,
Resources:-39 acs � Open Space-Otl,er
Agriculture,Parks&Recreation
0 Tax Parcels
2
3 David Stancil described the attributes of the property which includes a number of different
4 steep slopes, natural heritage areas, and resource lands along a stream. He said the property
5 adjoins Duke Forest to the west and Blackwood Mountain is just off the map in the top left corner.
6 Vice-Chair Fowler asked if the parcel between Duke Forest and the county property is
7 owned by the Treeist company, and is the one the county gave an easement to.
8 David Stancil said there is an easement on the property, and it will need to be preserved.
9 David Stancil referred to Map #1. He said the proposal is to make the property available
10 for sale for a non-profit to own and operate a field complex that would provide for both private and
11 public use. He reviewed the conditions of a potential sale described in the background information
12 for the agenda item. He said staff took the county's request for proposals template and modified
13 to address a solicitation of offers and proposals for the land and the construction of the desired
14 facility. He reviewed the process for soliciting offers. He said this is a new process for the county,
15 and they would welcome direction and feedback from the commissioners.
19
1 Commissioner Bedford asked for an explanation of private versus public use and does
2 there have to be public use to sell the land.
3 John Roberts said if the Board wants to restrict the use of the property, then it must be
4 sold to a non-profit that carries out that purpose.
5 Commissioner Bedford asked if the county would have a right to use the space.
6 John Roberts said if the property is sold, Orange County would not have any right to use
7 the space. He said if it is sold for a public purpose, then part of the deed restriction would mean
8 it must be open to the public to participate in athletic programming.
9 Commissioner Bedford said the non-profit could have a criteria like payment of a fee.
10 John Roberts said that is correct.
11 Bedford added that the non-profit could not discriminate.
12 John Roberts said that would be part of the negotiation.
13 David Stancil said that is one of the purposes of the Memorandum of Agreement.
14 John Roberts said the buyer of the property would want to have some say in the deed
15 restriction. He said part of the risk they are taking is that if they don't live up to the restrictions,
16 the property reverts to the county.
17 Commissioner Bedford asked how that could be fair.
18 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how the value is communicated to a potential buyer.
19 She asked if they must sell all 45 acres for recreation or could some be used for affordable housing
20 with a non-profit. She asked how close the property is to water and sewer.
21 David Stancil said the closest connection is the Town Operations Center, which is served
22 by OWASA. He said the urban services boundary is the southern border of the property and the
23 property is outside of the boundary. He said the way the document is written is that that non-
24 profits will submit proposals with an offer, and the county may or may not agree with that offer.
25 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked who would negotiate on behalf of the county.
26 Travis Myren said negotiations would be undertaken by staff and the Board would
27 ultimately have to approve those terms.
28 Commissioner Carter asked what is in the vicinity of the property.
29 David Stancil described the neighboring properties and their current uses.
30 Commissioner McKee asked if there is sewer and water at the southern boundary.
31 David Stancil said no.
32 Commissioner McKee asked if the county would negotiate prior to solicitation.
33 David Stancil said no. He said offers would be evaluated to ensure they conform with the
34 requirements. He said at that time an assessment would be performed with a report to the Board,
35 and then from there they would probably begin the negotiation process.
36 Commissioner McKee said that there are OWASA restrictions with the property and asked
37 if anything had changed since the discussion in November. He said people considering the
38 property should not be led to believe sewer and water will be available.
39 Vice-Chair Fowler asked if the county would put out an RFP and then choose one, or if
40 there is a bid process after or if you choose a person in that group and that's it.
41 John Roberts said the Board would choose whichever one was the most appropriate.
42 Commissioner Greene while there was interest in November by some commissioners to
43 use the property for affordable housing, she was not. She said she thought all of it should be sold
44 for recreation. She said that was the intent of the approved bond referendum when the property
45 was purchased, and the need is still present. She said the expense of building water and sewer
46 lines would be phenomenal and would not lead to any affordable housing. She said when the
47 Town of Chapel Hill sold the old library building, the town had an agreed upon sales price with a
48 deed restriction to preserve the building. She asked what prohibits the county from setting a price
49 for the property.
50 John Roberts said there's nothing that prohibits setting a price and it's up to the Board.
20
1 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she supports setting a price and negotiating from there.
2 She asked if duplexes, triplexes, or quads are permitted in the rural buffer.
3 David Stancil said they are not. He said the minimum lot size is 2 acres, which he thought
4 would preclude duplexes or multi-family units.
5 Cy Stober, Planning and Inspections Director, said duplexes are permitted if you double
6 the lot area that is otherwise required. He said if you have four acres, you could have one duplex.
7 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if someone wanted to put a quad there, they would
8 need eight acres.
9 Cy Stober said they would need eight, and at this time, zoning does not permit more than
10 duplexes.
11 Commissioner Carter asked if potential statutes would change zoning.
12 Cy Stober said in the last two General Assembly sessions there were bills to align zoning
13 requirements with building codes, but it is not yet law.
14 Commissioner Carter asked what the implications would be if the legislation passed.
15 Cy Stober said it is hard to say, and that the bills did not pass to crossover, to his
16 recollection.
17 Commissioner McKee said he would like for the Board to set a minimum price.
18 Commissioner Greene said she would like to set a price, but with the ability to accept a
19 lower offer.
20 Commissioner Bedford said she would like for the documents to state that they don't have
21 to accept any price.
22 Commissioner McKee said he would like an appraisal of the property.
23
24 PUBLIC COMMENTS:
25 Delores Bailey of EMPOWERment said Orange County is 111" in the state for housing
26 permit growth. She said that employers are looking for solutions for affordable housing so they
27 can recruit employees. She listed possible options for providing housing on this property. She
28 encouraged a collaboration between municipalities, non-profits, and for-profit developers to
29 address Orange County's housing needs.
30 Mike Hickey of Rainbow Soccer said there were two events in the last 10-15 years that
31 lead into this process. He said they had a public-private partnership with chapel Hill to renovate
32 the fields on Homestead Road. He said they helped raise the funds to put turf on the fields in
33 exchange for rental fees. He said the second was the purchase of the Rainbow Soccer fields in
34 Chapel Hill. He said it was 54 acres at$220,000, which is shocking, except that it was essentially
35 a lake, and it came with use restrictions. He said the county may be surprised with how the
36 appraisal comes back because of the use restrictions. He said that a public-private partnership
37 would be a better way to go. He said if the county sells it, make sure the restrictions are in line
38 with the Orange County and Chapel Hill restrictions for renting fields so that local groups can rent
39 them at a reasonable price.
40 Mike Strand of Triangle United Soccer said they are the competitive side of youth soccer
41 in Chapel Hill. He said that it will be difficult to sell the property at a high amount and then ask
42 the purchaser to turn it into a park with the caveat that the county can take the land back if
43 something goes wrong. He said the fields will not generate a profit unless someone charges
44 $200-300 an hour to rent them, which will exclude many groups. He said they have a clear vision
45 of what a public-private partnership looks like. He described the number of participants in Triangle
46 United Soccer and the economic impact of bringing in tournaments and events. He said the way
47 the proposal is laid out, it's a tough business model to maximize the sale of the property and then
48 ask someone to spend $4-6 million to create a park.
49
50 David Stancil said there was an appraisal done on the property a year earlier, and he
51 recalled that it was just under$25,000 an acre.
21
1 Travis Myren said it was $1.9 million for the full 79 acres.
2 Commissioner McKee said he believed that the property would bring in more than $25,000
3 an acre.
4 David Stancil said it may be helpful to look at the recent revaluation assessment.
5 Commissioner Greene said she would take an appraisal at face-value.
6 Commissioner Carter said housing is an important point of the strategic plan and she will
7 look for opportunities with county-owned property. She asked if the Board would investigate using
8 a portion of the property for housing.
9 Commissioner Portie-Ascott echoed Commissioner Carter's comments and asked if it is
10 possible for some of the land to be set aside for housing.
11 Commissioner Bedford said a study was done in 2018 on the possibility of housing on the
12 property, and the costs were prohibitive. She said there are other potential properties with access
13 to water and sewer. She said potential buyers need to know about easements for future trails on
14 the property. She said she wanted to sell the land for recreation. She said she did not want a
15 public-private partnership. She expressed concern about negotiating after multiple offers are
16 received. She highlighted item 5 in the proposed uses; she said it should say "for the public
17 purpose of recreation use." She expressed concerns that the ownership should revert to Orange
18 County if any time the buyer doesn't meet the stipulated conditions. She wanted to put conditions
19 in to be fair to a buyer who may not be able to meet conditions long-term. She said item 4.1 says
20 that prospective buyers shall have experience with the express purpose for this site, and the
21 operation and management of athletic field facilities with similar or greater size and complexity.
22 She said that would potentially cut Rainbow Soccer out. She asked that"similar size" be removed
23 and for prospective buyers to just describe their experience. She did not want to eliminate people
24 off the bat. She highlighted item 3.3 and said that the weighting seemed to be off, and the Board
25 should discuss it further.
26 Commissioner Greene said she is comfortable knowing that there was an appraisal and
27 that there will be multiple bidders. She said Commissioner Bedford's points about the criteria
28 were good. She asked where conditions were outlined in the document, as that is part of the
29 weighted criteria.
30 David Stancil said they were in section one, the proposal contents of section 2.6, and the
31 scope of services. He said that they can revise the document and create a conditions section.
32 Commissioner Greene said more specificity would help.
33 Vice-Chair Fowler said there was vagueness in the criteria. She said she was comfortable
34 with the previous appraisal. She said she did not see a need for setting a price, but she would
35 like to see a buyer that was going to serve Orange County residents. She said she would like to
36 see an emphasis on the number of Orange County residents that would be served. She said that
37 the land was purchased for recreation. She said the difficulty and expense of building affordable
38 housing on the site would make the housing unaffordable by the time it it's built.
39 Chair Hamilton asked which commissioners wanted to consider using the property for
40 housing. Commissioners McKee, Carter, and Portie-Ascott indicated they would like to see
41 affordable housing on the property. Chair Hamilton, Vice-Chair Fowler, and Commissioners
42 Bedford and Greene did not want to change the purpose.
43 Commissioner McKee said it was a large portion of land for recreation.
44 Chair Hamilton said that is what the Board had discussed in November.
45 Commissioner McKee expressed concern about the costs to the county for future
46 recreational use.
47 Chair Hamilton said the proposal is to solicit offers for fields and anything else is way in
48 the future. She said the Board needs to decide if they want to move forward with the solicitation
49 document. She said the Board needs to decide if they want to set a recommended price for the
50 property.
22
1 Chair Hamilton and Commissioners Carter, Portie-Ascott, and McKee said they wanted to
2 set a recommended price for the property. Vice-Chair Fowler and Commissioners Bedford and
3 Greene did not.
4 Chair Hamilton said the price could be the appraisal price.
5 David Stancil suggested staff revise the solicitation document and bring it back to the
6 Board for further discussion.
7 The Board agreed by consensus to have staff revise the solicitation document.
8 Vice-Chair Fowler asked if county staff previously drafted a plan for fields on this property
9 and if it took up the whole 45 acres.
10 David Stancil said they drafted plans for a 6-field complex, which included parking, septic
11 fields, infrastructure, easements, and stormwater needs. He said that plan took up most of the 45
12 acres. He said the actual fields will only be a portion of the area the commissioners are
13 considering.
14
15 c. Discussion of Moratorium on "Data Centers" as a Land Use
16 The Board received an overview of the impacts of data centers and discussed a possible 1-year
17 moratorium on new data centers as a permitted land use.
18
19 BACKGROUND: At the March 5, 2026, Board Business meeting, Commissioner Marilyn Carter
20 petitioned to ask staff to prepare a presentation for the Board's March 17, 2026, Business meeting
21 addressing the following:
22
23 1) The potential impacts of large-scale data center development in Orange County, including
24 electricity demand, water usage, land use compatibility, environmental considerations,
25 and potential impacts on residents' utility costs, and water quality.
26
27 2) Policy options available to the County, including, but not limited to, a temporary
28 moratorium on data center development, revising the Orange County Land Use Plan and
29 UDO, and the legal process required to implement each option.
30
31 3) Recommendations) for Board action.
32
33 Commissioner Jamezetta Bedford asked that noise and environmental justice also be included.
34
35 The County Attorney and Planning Director have prepared a presentation, with sources cited for
36 reference, regarding the potential impacts from "large-scale data centers". The County Attorney
37 also assessed two policy options available to the Board in declaring a moratorium on this land
38 use, less than or greater than 60 days. There are differing public notice criteria for the two
39 moratorium options.
40
41 A pending amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to regulate data centers as
42 a permitted land use may also be directed to staff, at the Board's pleasure. It is not possible to
43 amend the UDO's text within 60 days due to the administrative requirements of Orange County's
44 UDO.
45
46 Cy Stober, Planning and Inspections Director, made the following presentation:
47
48
23
1 Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Item 6-c:
Discussion of Moratorium on "Data
Centers" as a Land Use
2
3
4 Slide #2
General Definition of a Data Center
A large group of networked computer servers typically used by organizations for the remote storage,
processing,or distribution of large amounts of data.
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
6 Cy Stober said data centers can need their own power generation and water supply. He
7 said the conversation around data centers is rapidly evolving and changing.
8
24
1 Slide#3
Air Quality Impact of Data Centers
• Communities living in close proximity (i.e., one mile) to
EPA-regulated data centers have higher air pollution
burdens compared to the national median
• Communities of color within one mile of EPA-regulated
data centers face worse air pollution than other
communities near data centers and the typical (median)
community in the country
• Low-income communities within one mile of EPA-
regulated data centers tend to face higher levels of
nitrogen dioxide and diesel particulate matter than other
parts of the states where they are located. �1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #4
Water Use Impact of Data Centers
• Large data centers can consume up to 5 million
gallons per day, equivalent to the water use of a
town populated by up to 50,000 people.
• Novel technologies like direct-to-chip cooling
and immersion cooling can reduce water and
energy usage by data centers.
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
25
1 Slide #5
Electrical Use Impact of Data Centers
• Data centers can require large amounts of
power similar to a medium-sized city, accounting
for nearly 4.4 percent of U.S. annual electricity in
2023.
• The total national energy demand is estimated
to increase 20 percent by 2030.
• Evidence suggests that large facilities' drains on
water utility infrastructure leads to higher costs
for residents. •1,
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #6
Noise Impact of Data Centers
• Data centers require large cooling systems
to function, and these systems emit a
steady hum that can disturb nearby
residents.
— Local governments are setting noise limits,
often 65 decibels at the property line and 55
decibels in quieter or residential areas.
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
26
1 Slide #7
Local Land Use Compatibility of Data Centers
• Not currently defined or regulated by UDO
• Due to high utility needs — namely water and power —
there are very few areas in the county that can
hypothetically support a data center
• Staff must examine what land use categories might be
compatible with Data Centers
— Work must include Artificial Intelligence Data Centers, Data
Centers, Data Processing Facilities, Cryptocurrency Mining
Facilities
— Distinction between "large-scale"and "local"data centers is likely
needed
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #8
Moratorium Options
• Temporary Moratorium
— < 60 Days
• Public hearing may be held with one public notice
7+ days prior to the hearing
— 60+
• Public hearing may be held with one public notice
per week for two successive weeks prior to the
hearing
• First notice must be posted 25 — 10 days prior to
hearing
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
27
1 Slide #9
Manager Recommendations
• Direct staff to prepare materials for and notice a
legislative public hearing at the April 21 BOCC meeting
to declare a moratorium on "large-scale data centers" for
one (1) year; and
• Initiate an amendment to the Orange County UDO to
define and regulate both "large-scale" data centers,
inclusive of Artificial Intelligence Data Centers,
Cryptocurrency Mining Facilities, Data Centers, Data
Processing Facilities, and similar uses.
�1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
2
3 Commissioner Carter thanked staff for bringing the proposal and Commissioner Bedford's
4 questions about noise. She said item 8-g in the consent agenda resonates with this topic. She
5 thanked staff for bringing that forward in collaboration with the other municipalities to ask the North
6 Carolina Utilities Commission to take measures that ensure that residential and other commercial
7 rate payers are protected from unfairly bearing the costs of infrastructure built to support new
8 large economic development loads.
9 Commissioner Bedford thanked staff for the fast turnaround on the item and for
10 Commissioner Carter's motion at the previous business meeting. She thanked Commissioner
11 Carter and Commissioner Portie-Ascott for attending the NACo Legislative conference and
12 bringing this and other important information back to the Board.
13
14 PUBLIC COMMENTS:
15 John Rees of the Orange Chatham Sierra Club read the following statement:
16 "While I am not an expert, the reading I have done shows there are both environmental issues
17 and environmental justice issues regarding the of siting of data centers.
18 As we already discussed here, since Orange County doesn't currently have specific wording in
19 the UDO regulating land uses for data centers, enacting a moratorium - and then working with
20 county staff and subject matter experts would allow for rules that would better control data centers
21 and regulate them in such a way that they do not impose both an environmental and economic
22 impact on county residents.
23 The Sierra Club has handy documents and resources that suggest regulations and topics of
24 consideration, and also citations on what other states have done that I have already shared with
25 you.
26 For me, the key things to consider are:
27 Not making incumbent ratepayers take the risk of paying for capacity that services data centers
28 exclusively, or capacity that is stated to be need and then not used (leaving ratepayers with the
29 bill)
30
28
1 Clean Energy Comes First
2 Data centers will have backup electric generation. These generators are nearly always diesel
3 powered, with the associated emissions from large diesel motors.
4 "Emergency use"
5 In thinking of the 'back up generators', the expectation to most of us is these generators would
6 operate only in times when the primary source of power is lost.
7 However, part of the regulation should consider what consists of an emergency. Data centers may
8 switch to their backup systems when their primary costs of electric goes up. Meaning, the
9 generators will run all the time as long as they produce cheaper electricity. This means people
10 nearby will hear the generators and live with the emissions.
11 These are a lot of things to consider, and I've only scratched the surface. One thing to keep in
12 mind is that the Sierra Club is not anti-data center as a rule, as a certain amount of data centers
13 need to exist for the internet to function at all. And that also proves the point that time and
14 thoughtful analysis needs to be made before allowing data centers in Orange County. We hope
15 the process brings in subject matter experts and the Sierra Club is interested in participating in
16 that process. Thank you."
17
18 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to direct
19 staff to prepare for a legislative public hearing at the April 21, 2026 Board Business meeting to
20 declare a moratorium on "large-scale data centers" for one year and to initiate an amendment to
21 the Orange County LIDO to define and regulate "large-scale" data centers, inclusive of Artificial
22 Intelligence Data Centers, Cryptocurrency Mining Facilities, Data Centers, Data Processing
23 Facilities, and similar uses.
24
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 7. Reports
28 None.
29
30 8. Consent Agenda
31
32 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
33 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
34 • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
35
36 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to approve
37 the consent agenda.
38
39 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
40
41 a. Minutes for February 17, 2026 Business Meeting
42 The Board approved the minutes for the February 17, 2026 Business Meeting.
43 b. Second Chance Month Proclamation
44 The Board approved a proclamation recognizing April 2026 as Second Chance Month and
45 honoring Orange County's reentering residents and the people and groups who support them.
46 c. Long COVID Awareness Month Proclamation
47 The Board approved a proclamation recognizing March 2026 as Long COVID Awareness Month
48 and retroactively designated March 15, 2026, as "Long COVID Awareness Day" in Orange
49 County.
50
51
29
1 d. Recognition of Nancy Freeman as Retiring Orange County Tax Administrator
2 The Board recognized and expressed gratitude to Nancy Freeman for her dedication and service
3 to Orange County.
4 e. Permanent Supportive Housing Renewal Contract with Inter-Faith Council
5 The Board approved a contract renewal with the Inter-Faith Council (IFC) for IFC's Permanent
6 Supportive Housing (PSH) program in Orange County, providing both shelter services and PSH
7 services to residents seeking housing assistance.
8 f. Revised Opioid Settlement Fund Spending Authorization Resolutions
9 The Board approved amended resolutions for the final opioid settlement fund spending
10 authorization for FY 2026.
11 g. Comment Letter Addressing Duke Energy's Proposed Carbon Plan Integrated
12 Resource Plan (CPIRP) Submitted to the North Carolina Utilities Commission
13 The Board approved joining regional local government partners as a signatory to a joint comment
14 letter addressing Duke Energy's proposed Carbon Plan Integrated Resource Plan, submitted to
15 the North Carolina Utilities Commission on October 1, 2025.
16 h. Approval of the 2026 Orange County Heat Action Plan
17 The Board approved the 2026 Orange County Heat Action Plan.
18 L Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Amendment #8
19 The Board approved budget, grant, and capital project ordinance amendments for Fiscal Year
20 2025-26.
21 j. Board and Commissions —Appointments
22 The Board approved the Boards and Commissions appointments as reviewed and discussed
23 during the March 10, 2026 Work Session.
24
25 Commissioner Greene highlighted the Heat Action Plan in the consent agenda and
26 thanked staff for their work.
27 Referring to item 6-c, Commissioner McKee said the generators needed for data centers
28 are the size of rail cars and could power the Town of Hillsborough.
29
30 9. County Manager's Report
31 Travis Myren reviewed the topics for upcoming Board meetings.
32
33 10. County Attorney's Report
34 John Roberts said the following day there will be a legislative committee on property tax
35 reform and he would share a link with the Board if they would like to listen.
36
37 11. Appointments
38 None.
39
40 12. Information Items
41 • March 5, 2026 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
42 • Memorandum —America 250 — Proposed County Events
43 • Memorandum — Proposed Limited Obligation Bond Financing - Orange Grove Fire
44 District
45
46 13. Closed Session
47 None.
48
49
50
51
30
1 Adjournment
2
3 A motion was made by Chair Hamilton, seconded by Vice-Chair Fowler, to adjourn the
4 meeting at 9:33 p.m.
5
6 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7
8 Jean Hamilton, Chair
9
10
11 Recorded by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board
12
13 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board