By Miles Layton

PLYMOUTH — A $1 sale of a town-owned building to a local nonprofit set off one of the tensest debates of Monday night’s Plymouth Town Council meeting, pitting Mayor Crystal Davis against newly appointed Councilwoman Yan Weiner in an argument that stretched over fairness, taxpayer ownership and what the town owes its neediest residents.

At issue was Resolution 2026-12, a measure allowing the town to convey the vacant building at 118 Washington Street to a nonprofit organization, Shadid #233 — the Shiners, under North Carolina General Statute, which permits municipalities to sell property to nonprofits for below-market value when the buyer will use it for community development purposes benefiting low- and moderate-income residents.

Town Attorney Arnita Dula explained the legal basis for the sale before council took up discussion. “The sale procedure is on (NC General Statute) 160A-279,” Dula said, “but there are other statutes in Chapter 160D that relate to community development, and that’s the reason why you can sell it to this particular organization — because they’re doing community activities to impact the greater community, particularly those persons of low and moderate income.”

Weiner immediately raised concerns about process. “So since the town owns this particular property, that means the Plymouth taxpayers and residents also own this property,” she said. “How come the other 99.9 percent of the residents of Plymouth don’t get an opportunity if they want this property as well? Let’s say hypothetically for a dollar — I might be one.”

Davis responded sharply. “Why didn’t you come forward and ask?” she said. “If you were a nonprofit and if you wanted that property, why didn’t you come forward and ask?”

The mayor went on to defend the deal, describing the building’s decade-long history sitting largely unused. “For 10 years we have had someone rent that building who has not put one dollar or tax base back into our community at all,” Davis said. “It was used for storage. We only got 10 dollars in 10 years when that building was rented. Now we’ll get taxes from it, which we did not get before.”

Davis said the nonprofit receiving the property has partnered with the local JROTC program, provided scholarships to underprivileged and autistic children, and organized a community bike ride, and that the town lacks structured activities for children. “I want to help,” Davis said. “I’m at every event and I support these guys because I can’t do it all by myself. None of us can do it all by ourselves.”

Weiner remained unconvinced, questioning whether the deal made financial sense given the property’s estimated worth. “I understand — I think it was appraised back in April, and it was appraised for thirty-some-thousand,” she said. “If that was my property, you want me to turn around and sell it for one dollar? That’s almost a joke to me.”

“That’s not even my concern,” Davis fired back. “I’m gonna tell you what’s a joke to me. A joke to me is that we’re arguing about helping a nonprofit that really does community-based work.”

Weiner asked whether the resolution included any provision requiring the nonprofit to actually complete renovations, floating the idea of a performance bond — a request Dula rejected as legally inapplicable to a straightforward property sale. Weiner also asked whether the deed’s 25-year reversion clause, which would return the property to the town if the nonprofit stopped using it for community purposes, could be shortened. Dula said the 25-year figure was arbitrary and could be adjusted at council’s direction.

Long-story-short, Davis and Weiner went back and forth on the issue, so much so that later in the meeting when discussing other unrelated matters, Weiner kept bringing up the issue which brought her much heat from Davis and others.

Councilwoman Kim Williams and Mayor Pro Tem Donsenia Teel spoke in favor of the sale, arguing the town faces little financial risk. “The town is protected either way,” Teel said, “because if these men go in and refurbish this building and then don’t do what they say, then the building comes back to the town refurbished. That’s not going to cost the town anything. But if they go in and do great works for the town of Plymouth, still the town is benefiting.”

Weiner briefly moved to rescind her prior vote on the matter and asked whether the sale could instead be opened to competitive bidding, prompting further exchange with Davis over whether the change was properly noticed on the meeting agenda. “You didn’t add that to the agenda tonight,” Davis told her. “You should have done that at the beginning of the meeting.”

With Councilman John Shelton hesitating over a related correction to the resolution’s legal description, Davis pressed for a final vote. The roll call ended in a split vote among the six-member council.

“He’s undecided, so therefore that means a yes when it’s undecided,” Davis said, characterizing the tie before casting her own vote. “So I’ll break that tie, and my vote is yes.”

The resolution passed with the mayor’s tiebreaking vote, clearing the way for the town to convey the Washington Street property to the nonprofit for one dollar, subject to the reversion clause discussed during the meeting.

The vote came the same night council tabled a separate, unrelated real estate matter — an option-to-purchase agreement with Preservation North Carolina for a different building — after Dula clarified that the paperwork presented to council did not match how the deal had originally been described. Council voted unanimously to table that item until October pending further clarification from the organization.

More on that in a future story.