Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
1 <br /> 2 MOTION by Randy Herman to find as a matter of fact that the evidence presented on pages 19-22 and pages 26-41 and <br /> 3 also the evidence presented in the minutes contained in Exhibit 3 the board finds the property is being used for <br /> 4 agritourism as the term is defined in the statute. There was no second. <br /> 5 <br /> 6 Barry Katz said he does not believe the farm plan summary, adding that it's an aspirational document and not a <br /> 7 substantive document. <br /> 8 <br /> 9 Randy Herman said the board has 100 pages of minutes concerning the activities that were taking place on the <br /> 10 property and the statute defines agritourism to include weddings so he doesn't think there is any question that weddings <br /> 11 are taking place on the property. <br /> 12 <br /> 13 Barry Katz said fine, weddings are taking place on the property. <br /> 14 <br /> 15 Susan Halkiotis asked Randy Herman to amend the motion to not include the farm plan summary. <br /> 16 Barry Katz said he would prefer to just say Kara Brewer is holding weddings there. <br /> 17 <br /> 18 Randy Herman said the board has to point to a specific piece of evidence that supports that finding and that would be <br /> 19 the previous minutes. <br /> 20 <br /> 21 Karen Barrows suggested only using pages 19-22 as evidence. <br /> 22 <br /> 23 Barry Katz said that would be fine. <br /> 24 <br /> 25 Randy Herman said a building permit is also aspirational and not what is actually taking place. <br /> 26 <br /> 27 Barry Katz agreed and said he would be fine with including pages 19-25. <br /> 28 <br /> 29 Susan Halkiotis suggested the evidence include the minutes of previous meetings where it was not contested that <br /> 30 weddings are taking place on the property rather than the building permit and the plans. <br /> 31 <br /> 32 MOTION by Randy Herman to find that based on the evidence previously presented in the minutes from the October 10, <br /> 33 2016, and October 24, 2016, meetings, which the board has accepted into evidence as Exhibit 3, that there is <br /> 34 agritourism activity taking place on the property as that term is defined in the statute. Barry Katz seconded. <br /> 35 DISCUSSION: Susan Halkiotis said she would vote for it but strictly on the wording, `agritourism as defined by the new <br /> 36 statute.' Barry Katz added that in the board hearings the board heard testimony but the board never accepted that this <br /> 37 was a real agricultural entity that used agritourism as a way to supplement the income of a farmer. What we were <br /> 38 experiencing was an attempt to have an events center placed in an agricultural environment where the events center <br /> 39 was a business entity and it was not in fact adjunct or supplemental to an agricultural entity, Barry Katz said. Rather, it <br /> 40 was the primary purpose if not the sole purpose of citing it where it was. <br /> 41 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 42 <br /> 43 MOTION by Randy Herman to find as a matter of fact that based on the deed which was included on pages 78-80 of the <br /> 44 documents and also the Articles of Merger on pages 85-86 the property is currently owned by Wild Flora Farm, LLC. <br /> 45 DISCUSSION: Susan Halkiotis said she was thinking about it. Barry Katz asked for Randy Herman to be clearer because <br /> 46 Southeast Property Group, LLC, was the purchaser. Randy Herman said the purchaser was Southeast Property Group, <br /> 47 LLC, and then Southeast Property Group, LLC, merged with Wild Flora Farm, LLC, with Wild Flora Farm, LLC, being <br /> 48 the surviving entity. So, as of today, the owner of the property is Wild Flora Farm, LLC. Susan Halkiotis noted that was <br /> 49 as of February 14, 2018. Randy Herman agreed. <br /> 50 SECONDED by Susan Halkiotis. <br /> 23 <br />