[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6570326,"mediaKeyId","3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963","parentId",3210781,"title","Orange County manager presents FY 2025–26 budget; commissioners press for cuts, options to limit tax impact","audioSeconds",368,"startMs",3096000,"endMs",3464000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963&start=3096&end=3464","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963/thumbnail_3096000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6570326/Orange-County/North-Carolina/Orange-County-manager-presents-FY-202526-budget-commissioners-press-for-cuts-options-to-limit-tax-impact","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6570326-c860657968373abdb8000b5274e86b2c/orig.mp4?Expires=1773141742&Signature=IYAUSMGVPA9HPpgFi~ZD5lpugfKGYCfo4N84WssVtd1vlUBp4cTweA~yAvUH4RAkER1aDi7rZmXINpXkabD6tZ-RnGuTSA6WnXfsQvQ~nuyfrTxfqYjBOqgdSBWFG4~379RGsmLCF-1pNllQd~628ARFNW4hxshtQie0OkiuoyKU4DEJxD4Z5bqgEo1LBy88LMQsTfjSDJvLO0RIvAsLICZQkURhG19ECpHUEP6vIGS~BJb~2pmCsNa8hQHeRN08wsyZmzmwBYCrrgG28nCDeFDI5rh9ppKcrIpAqDMmEdmVANgy7ovxrFCmH8Z7syTKgp7x-9zJjnSV85SZVftyPw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Orange County","date","2025-05-06T00:00:00Z","article","County Manager Travis Mahren presented a recommended fiscal year 2025–26 operating budget to the Orange County Board of Commissioners on May 6, 2025, proposing a modest tax‑rate increase above the revenue‑neutral rate to fund school planning and county operations while preserving core services.

Mahren said the manager’s recommendation reflects six priorities: minimize tax increases, preserve social safety‑net services, continue school funding, invest in employee compensation, align spending with the county strategic plan and create budget flexibility to respond to likely appeals from the recent property revaluation. He told the board the package includes a 2.95¢ increase above revenue neutral: 1.94¢ for school pay‑go capital and 1¢ for school continuation and county operations. “All of the good ideas that are in here are theirs. All of the bad ideas are mine,” Mahren said as he introduced the budget and budget staff.

The recommendation translated to a total county tax rate of about 65.59¢ and, according to the manager, would raise about $9 million to support the recommended spending. Mahren gave examples of homeowner impacts: under the manager’s approach, the additional county tax cost on a $400,000 home would be roughly $118 per year for the pay‑go component and $60 for the operational 1¢, he said. He also described the county’s assumptions about appeals to the revaluation: informal appeals filed through April 30 requested about $334.9 million in reductions, and the tax office adjusted its assumed successful appeal share from 5% to 3% for planning purposes.

Why it matters: Commissioners and members of the public stressed the immediate effects of any tax change on long‑time and fixed‑income residents. Commissioners said the board must weigh preserving services and staff compensation against the cumulative tax burden on households already reporting hardship because of higher valuations.

Key discussion points and options raised

- Debt versus pay‑go: Several commissioners asked for scenarios that would replace part or all of the pay‑go with debt (issuing bonds) or delay projects a year to lower the near‑term tax impact. Mahren and staff said modeling of debt versus pay‑go and of delaying projects was underway and would be available at upcoming budget work sessions.

- Potential cuts and timing: Commissioner McKee asked for a specific agenda item showing cuts needed to reach the revenue‑neutral rate; she renewed a petition for presentations on specific cuts at a May work session. Several commissioners said they intended to use the budget‑amendment process to propose targeted reductions and emphasized that the board can submit amendments after the manager’s recommendation.

- Department and position changes: The manager described a range of adjustments to limit the tax increase, including 16 of 27 departments proposed below base, a 10% travel and training reduction (excluding required certifications), four vacant positions eliminated, and moving some general‑fund expenses to other funding sources (for example, occupancy tax for an arts commission coordinator). He also described adding positions paid for by savings or enterprise revenues (mechanics for fleet services, a facilities maintenance technician offset by contract reductions, and a billing position projected to bring additional EMS revenue).

- Employee compensation and benefits: The recommended budget includes a 2% across‑the‑board wage adjustment for permanent employees (costed at roughly $1.8 million), continuation of merit awards and step programs in certain departments, and budgeted increases tied to employer retirement and health insurance cost growth.

- Schools: The manager recommended a 3% current‑expense increase for both school systems in planning numbers (about $3.2 million), and a $6.4 million pay‑go allocation tied to the school capital program. The manager noted uncertainty about the state salary funding number (the Senate and schools are using differing planning assumptions), and commissioners flagged the timing mismatch between state budget outcomes and the county adoption schedule.

Background and next steps

Mahren outlined the schedule for public hearings and work sessions: a May 13 public hearing at Southern Human Services, additional work sessions, and an intent‑to‑adopt schedule aimed at adopting the budget in mid‑June; he noted budget amendments must be submitted by the board by June 4. Commissioners asked staff to provide alternate scenarios (debt versus pay‑go, one‑year delay of capital projects) as soon as possible.

Ending

Commissioners did not vote on the recommended budget that evening; instead they used the meeting as the formal launch of the public hearing and amendment process. Mahren and budget staff asked commissioners to call with questions and said staff would provide the requested scenarios before the next scheduled budget work sessions.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Orange County - BOCC Business Meeting 20250506 - May 06, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","County Manager Travis Mahren presented a recommended FY 2025–26 operating budget on May 6, 2025, that would raise the county tax rate 2.95¢ above the revenue‑neutral rate to fund school pay‑go capital and county operations while preserving core services.","taxTitle","Orange County, North Carolina","taxId",3848,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6570316,"Board adopts resolution to seek Local Government Commission approval for spring financing; public hearing held with no speakers",806,7518000,8324000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963&start=7518&end=8324","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963/thumbnail_7518000.jpg","/articles/6570316/Orange-County/North-Carolina/Board-adopts-resolution-to-seek-Local-Government-Commission-approval-for-spring-financing-public-hearing-held-with-no-speakers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6570316-9eabb850b07adf320ded50ca75734d38/orig.mp4?Expires=1773141742&Signature=iCmPKd9dpncBVaM27w5jrJL~G6uqpqQALIDHugoWshVLZNnmoYSQS51fOhlbf~Umqk9-7kykrkxu8zpnWj51TvgTHLr54l~nGndYKz-Uv7VU44TPZy4r5Ly9HxClCIOGntDHLEj32WVXjw2oJ2tT8nf4UfEKPduic7fotWeNjI4~GfPXrg9Vw5n39zXpGZCSmlv8L7JXDBWHfHiTPtZnbiH~7nhIXLbPoP664S0m76w9N25PdpEkP8qYn~EqwO7txK9ou1wBCfsOZ-q5W95d-Hpgc~m2~VnRNUZ2O4ztkQhU10glw6O5thEgMp12ta9e-sUD-je4wxhKJ5ZJ3MsKOw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Orange County Board of Commissioners held a public hearing and adopted a resolution on May 6 authorizing staff to submit an application to the North Carolina Local Government Commission (LGC) for spring 2025 financing to support school and county capital projects.

Finance staff presented the financing plan and described the portion of projects proposed for the spring bond issue: recurring capital for roofing, mechanical systems, school safety and deferred maintenance for Orange County Schools and Chapel Hill schools; county projects for parks, facility electrical and HVAC improvements, public safety radios, IT infrastructure, affordable housing projects, vehicle replacements and Sportsplex work. The presentation listed a not‑to‑exceed aggregate amount publicized earlier of roughly $77,800,000 across the school districts and county projects. Staff also said the package would use a deed of trust as security with a 50% collateral test and that the county’s available collateral exceeds the minimum required.

Board action

Following the presentation, the board opened the public hearing; no members of the public spoke. A motion to adopt the resolution supporting the LGC application was made and seconded; the board approved the resolution by voice vote and directed staff to file the application with the LGC for final approval and pricing. Staff said bond pricing is expected in early June and estimated market interest during the presentation at 4.5%–5.5% at current conditions.

Why it matters

If approved by the LGC and sold, the financing would fund capital repairs and improvements across schools and county facilities described in the capital improvement plan that the board previously authorized. Bond counsel and staff told the board the financing would be structured with maturities generally from five to 20 years and with semiannual principal and interest payments, and that rating agencies had been briefed.

Ending

The resolution to proceed with the LGC application was adopted; staff will return with finalized pricing and documents after LGC review and market pricing in June.","The Orange County Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution on May 6 to apply to the North Carolina Local Government Commission for spring 2025 financing to fund school and county capital projects, after holding a public hearing with no public speakers.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6570321,"Long‑time homeowners and Habitat leaders urge county to address revaluation impacts; commissioners point to assistance programs",541,868000,1409000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963&start=868&end=1409","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963/thumbnail_868000.jpg","/articles/6570321/Orange-County/North-Carolina/Longtime-homeowners-and-Habitat-leaders-urge-county-to-address-revaluation-impacts-commissioners-point-to-assistance-programs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6570321-fde1b9f94605c0ba7b29f008b39d5276/orig.mp4?Expires=1773141743&Signature=ed68xjePfEdlhfMzB9ME6trutRDmJ4kV81l11wszNBfyCBWfnBoevfqm~gXx6FuyfULQ1EcccjrF0VwaGuCbgcUu42h6jaBVK4bHOVcIMILVXgr2ZtEl-RjyDTlpPuBPSwt5oV0Skb1vWE-huN0mGy2HhUWbe7YO-lZmrt0SOZI1JxadXW-IGDjbCkfq-9cMX0zSrCBcCTpXNUK7XgvObz-ymj9fEMG0FDUrjmQGqaY2Rm~TMZUR4MyxuDbNQ3MbIorKt12kc5Mo4rPPFgbz23xvlkUYZBJ4BmQ4VVeqXId68du72oo00ozU~HbP7~H9TVX4nnQTKS8h8StPDqmHpg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Several residents and affordable‑housing advocates told the Orange County Board of Commissioners on May 6 that the county’s recent property revaluation has raised appraisals in ways they say risk displacing long‑time homeowners.

Speakers described decades of ownership, low‑income program histories and sharply higher appraisals. Joanne Mitchell, president of Homeowners United of Habitat for Humanity in Orange County, told the board Habitat homeowners face “unrealistic” increases because their homes were purchased through program terms and not on the open market; she asked the board to consider reevaluation approaches that account for Habitat eligibility. Eileen Williamson and Conetta Swan, other long‑time homeowners, said home repairs and drainage issues make current appraisals unfair and asked about appeals and assistance options.

Why it matters: Many public speakers linked higher appraisals to the risk of tax bills outpacing fixed or limited incomes, and several asked for the board to consider legislative options or tailored approaches for long‑time and program‑qualified homeowners.

County response and assistance options

Chair James Bedford and other commissioners acknowledged the concerns and described county resources and next steps. Commissioner Green said staff would look to see whether legislative relief would be required to treat certain affordable homeowners similarly to the Community Home Trust model. County staff and commissioners also highlighted the long‑time homeowners assistance program (LHA), which the manager said typically opens around August 1 and targets residents who have lived in their homes at least five years and meet income limits; the manager and commissioners urged residents to apply when it opens. The manager also noted county staff would ensure tax office outreach for appeal procedures and that the tax office would follow up directly with speakers.

Public comment detail and examples

- Joanne Mitchell said she represents about 445 Habitat homes across 12 neighborhoods and asked the board to “appeal the process or amend the tax reevaluation for all Habitat for Humanity homeowners.”
- Conetta Swan described a recent appraisal dated March 18, 2025, and said her family used Farmers Home Administration financing when buying their home; she asked that such program histories be considered in valuation comparisons.
- Eileen Williamson said her home is largely original and cited structural issues and drainage that she argues were not reflected in her new value.

Next steps

Commissioners asked staff to ensure the tax office contacts residents who raised appeals and to provide information on the LHA program. Commissioner Green said the board will “be mindful of the comments we have received throughout this process” and will consider whether to pursue legislative options before the county’s next budget cycle.

Ending

Speakers were told staff from the tax office would reach out to explain appeals processes and that more targeted assistance through the county’s long‑time homeowner program could be available when applications open in the summer. The board did not take immediate policy action that evening but committed to follow up with staff and to consider options during the budget review and by possible future legislative requests.","Multiple residents and community leaders told the Board of Commissioners the recent property revaluation threatens long‑time homeowners and affordable housing participants and urged the board to consider exemptions or other measures; commissioners and staff outlined existing assistance programs and possible legislative options.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6570306,"Votes at a glance: Orange County Board of Commissioners — May 6, 2025",6564,2929000,9493000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963&start=2929&end=9493","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963/thumbnail_2929000.jpg","/articles/6570306/Orange-County/North-Carolina/Votes-at-a-glance-Orange-County-Board-of-Commissioners-May-6-2025","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6570306-d9f61b1b049d42d28288e37318dcee6c/orig.mp4?Expires=1773141743&Signature=VRmQs5TXQ4L6db2QD7CQmGwfy~P1mw~yo6x5ofS~KQCZ8HpTdLfYfaNCzdrG0OAuH8msagQwTGth4QhH~CRkCv6nvkaZ8K6Bi6HzLAyhhLB72zbeeCpUrSiG7DNCSJF5wLR7f8BuwIA-WVJUzCRbmrGI~pvPUIQpTZXnRKbnmOcQVLaGRBjoHAwbt4xWuyiNQE19D5SKt0i2eF7sYAtUuqpNxZ6q8BHKjc0Ny3lAm4deKElt-N4~FBvzaByFiPXNwkHO7gCw7kmI3DigMQbe0cdI8bXiG1fkYXRHrE1CXKCiccrkRrIBz9QvrcQrEB7jUXDvB0EFzojxvp3l08WSwg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At its May 6, 2025 meeting the Orange County Board of Commissioners recorded several formal voice votes and motions. This roundup lists each formal action and the outcome as recorded in the meeting minutes/transcript.

Votes and outcomes

- Mental Health Awareness Month proclamation: The board adopted a proclamation recognizing May 2025 as Mental Health Awareness Month in Orange County. Motion moved and seconded on the dais; passed by voice vote (ayes recorded; no named roll call in the transcript).

- Spring financing resolution (Local Government Commission application): The board opened a public hearing, heard no public speakers, and adopted a resolution directing staff to submit an application to the North Carolina Local Government Commission for spring 2025 financing to support school and county capital projects. Motion was seconded and passed by voice vote; staff will proceed with LGC filing and pricing.

- Opioid settlement community grants: The board approved the Opioid Advisory Committee’s recommended community grant awards totaling $230,000 and directed health department staff to prepare contracts to begin July 1. Motion moved and seconded; passed by voice vote.

- Consent agenda: The board approved the consent agenda by voice vote (motion and second recorded). The consent agenda contained routine items and proclamations noted in the meeting packet (detailed items were not read into the record in full during the meeting transcript excerpt).

Notes on vote records

The meeting transcript records these votes as voice approvals after motions and seconds; no roll‑call tallies with member names and counts appear in the transcript excerpt provided. Where the transcript lacked a specific mover or second, the article records the motion as “moved”/“seconded” and the outcome as recorded in the transcript (approved by voice vote).","Summary of formal board votes taken May 6, 2025: adoption of a mental‑health proclamation, approval of the spring financing resolution to file with the LGC, approval of opioid settlement community grants and adoption of the consent agenda.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6570312,"Opioid advisory committee recommends $230,000 in community grants; board approves allocations",964,8498000,9462000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963&start=8498&end=9462","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3210781-ecc2325b460ae2c66469ac44774e5963/thumbnail_8498000.jpg","/articles/6570312/Orange-County/North-Carolina/Opioid-advisory-committee-recommends-230000-in-community-grants-board-approves-allocations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6570312-520f540c02d5ed65198d1fdebb7db223/orig.mp4?Expires=1773141743&Signature=cMNCDKYXUARTbFC8nv2ENZrOy8VSGdYGpXedXoLjlNw2SSQpwibERhVgTSc5f89NJmScqI7lhS0XbSkC4gmXx0iTb1af-Bm-zirXj5EqoVjKu3LBTSaBhs0j~wCERoyUt38D3qRWLRwYPm9wh51CHu4I91XhU2yzCjuwb1zwu8L6orvfGK~99QFe5vbpc9GBw-BNjidS3aPdAawhqhIcUMe6GY55bPesuVOOKIUx13dLFYyecNoZxf5VtZfRritDmzSzdalNsTOBE9-NEtfLHK7aGsjko0RHcxkZ2tHrLyaOEIGAdzBhhgoh-uJhGPoSDgbvx4POqWGqx9nMKAO4-A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Orange County Opioid Advisory Committee proposed and the Board of Commissioners approved community grant awards totaling $230,000 at the May 6 meeting, allocating settlement funds for local programs that the committee said target high‑risk populations, harm‑reduction services and recovery supports.

Committee process and priorities

Committee chair Stuart (presenting) summarized the application process: applications were solicited in January, workshops and technical assistance were offered, applications were scored using a rubric (project narrative, sustainability, equity impact, organizational readiness, partnerships and evaluation) and a subcommittee of community and health‑department volunteers reviewed proposals and recommended awards aligned with the committee’s priority population (people actively misusing opioids, those at high risk, people in recovery needing ongoing support and harm‑reduction needs). The committee emphasized evidence‑based strategies and cultural/linguistic access for underserved populations.

Recommended awards and board action

The committee recommended funding these proposals (amounts recommended; requested amounts in parentheses):

- P My Health Services — $50,400 (requested $50,400) to provide medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) at no cost to 36 new patients at Carrboro and Chapel Hill sites.
- El Futuro — $50,000 (requested $74,115) to train and expand community mental‑health worker capacity and provide services to Spanish‑speaking residents.
- Freedom House — $72,000 (requested $144,926) to fund a peer‑support specialist position (committee recommended peer support funding given hiring constraints for a medical provider).
- UNC SHEC syringe program — $37,600 (requested $196,000; committee recommended continued, limited support for community syringe‑program operations).
- Reintegration Support Network (RSN) — $20,000 (requested $20,000) to fund mentor training and supports for youth with justice involvement.

After presentation of the recommendations, a commissioner moved approval of the allocations and another seconded; the board approved the recommended awards by voice vote and directed health department staff to prepare contracts for a July 1 start date. The advisory committee noted that the county’s opioid settlement payments will decline beginning in fiscal 2027 and that award decisions were made with the payment schedule and program sustainability in mind.

Why it matters

The awards use county opioid settlement funds to sustain and expand local treatment, harm reduction and peer‑support services. The committee prioritized programs that target populations most at risk and increase culturally appropriate access to services.

Ending

The board adopted the committee’s recommendations and asked staff to execute contracts and report progress; final authorization and contract details will be completed ahead of the July 1 contract start date.","The county’s opioid advisory committee recommended community grants totaling $230,000 to five local programs focused on medication‑assisted treatment, harm reduction, peer support and youth reintegration; the board approved the recommended awards and directed staff to implement contracts July 1.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Orange County manager presents FY 2025–26 budget; commissioners press for cuts, options to limit tax impact

Board adopts resolution to seek Local Government Commission approval for spring financing; public hearing held with no speakers

Long‑time homeowners and Habitat leaders urge county to address revaluation impacts; commissioners point to assistance programs

Votes at a glance: Orange County Board of Commissioners — May 6, 2025

Opioid advisory committee recommends $230,000 in community grants; board approves allocations