2022_06_08 BOER MINUTES - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DocuSign Envelope ID:6933A5D1-3883-438D-A6BB-A5D247790AOE Evidence submitted by the county representative: As this was a continuation based on the motion of the board to ask for advice from the County Attorney as well as documents from the appellant,the Tax Office presented no new evidence. • Orange County Board of Equalization&Review form with brief summary of the subject property stating property tax exemption was denied due to the use of the property being for- profit. The organization's preschool is charging market rates for the services provided. An April 19,2022, County letter was mailed informing appellant of not being eligible for exemption as of January 1,2022 as County found no evidence the property is being used for an exempt purpose as specified in G.S. 105-278.4. • 2022 Application for Property Tax Exemption or Exclusion • 2021 Tax bill • IRS letter which grants tax exempt status to Chapel Hill Cooperative Preschool • Chapel Hill Cooperative Tuition Fees from website www.chapelhillcoop.com/enroll/tuition • UNC School of Government"Difficult Exemption Questions"from Coates Canons,NC Government Law Ms. McLean clarified that nonprofit organizations having the IRS tax exempt status 501(c)3 does not guarantee the organization can qualify for an exemption of North Carolina property tax because the use of the property drives the exemption and not just the tax status of the organization. Ms. Wright stated that the denial was based on the preschool charging market rates for their tuition and under G.S. 105-278.4a(2) "The owner is not organized or operated for profit..."The county requested the financial statements of the school to demonstrate that they were not for profit. The school refused to provide the requested financial documents. James Bryan, staff attorney,verified that Mr. Meyers had reviewed the video and evidence from the previous meeting,to ensure he was up to date on the evidence that had been presented. Mr. Bryan stated that financial documents are a factor to qualify for exemption under 105-278.7, and that both 105-278.7 and 105-278.4 deal with educational institutions, so since the Eagle Nest court case used market rents,then you could also apply that precedence to 105-278.4. He stated in regards to the email presented from Chris Mc Laughlin,he was not present at the hearing to be questioned, and the board should give the email the weight as they felt it deserved accordingly. Motion of the Board To grant the exemption under 105-278.4 Made the motion Leon Meyers Seconded the motion Hunter Beattie Voted For Ryan Petrone Voted Against