|
Tuesday, Sept. 13
Appeal Presentation to Village Council
The Appeal with 750 signatures was presented to the Pinehurst
Village Council Tuesday. We continue to receive additional
signatures daily and are now approaching 800. We will forward these
to the Pinehurst Village Council with a cover letter in groups of 25
or so.
The presentation was professional, orderly and went extremely well,
concluding with a standing ovation from the over 125 Pinewild people
in attendance. In hindsight, the only improvement might have been to
have even more of the people that signed the Appeal in the audience.
The Council listened attentively, seemed interested in several of
the points that were addressed, but made no comments, and promised
to take the information "under advisement".
Copies of the entire presentation, along with several key documents
including the Village Policy stating that "annexation should
predominantly be voluntary or by mutual agreement", various comments
from Village officials confirming this philosophy, NC Annexation
laws, etc. were provided to The Pilot, The Fayetteville Observer and
The Independent.
The Appeal was presented by John Boesch, who provided the following
comments prior to reading the Appeal and presenting all the
signatures in a very thick white binder:
"First, I’d like to thank Mayor Smith and the Village Council for
agreeing to hear our presentation in the Assembly Hall.
My name is John Boesch. I live in Pinewild. My main purpose today is
to present to the Village Council an Appeal signed by a significant
number of my neighbors.
I’d like to preface that with a few remarks. Mayor Smith’s September
2 article in The Pilot is probably a good framework for my comments.
Our opposition to the highly controversial, proposed Involuntary
Annexation is characterized as negative publicity. We don’t agree.
We have been and will continue to voice our opposition to abuses
such as taxation without representation, and the usurping of
property rights. We call this “free speech.”
The September 2 article stated that it was intended to help
Pinehurst residents understand the reasons and justification of the
Involuntary Annexation. We submit there is no justification. In
written form and in conversations, Village officials have stated
that “we will not annex anyone who does not want to be annexed.”
I’d like to quote from a letter sent by the Village to a Pinewild
resident: “over the past 14 years, successive Village Councils have
not once annexed an area where a majority of the residents did not
want to be annexed.”
What has changed? Is it possible that the $6 million dollars in
revenue that Pinehurst is projecting in the first five years after
Involuntary Annexation is just too “rich” to be passed up?
Should anyone on the Village Council care that the increased taxes
from Involuntary Annexation will negatively impact many Pinewild
residents on fixed incomes?
Should anyone care that hundreds of thousands of those dollars will
be taken annually from Moore County’s projected revenues…monies much
more urgently needed by the County than the Village?
Should anyone on the Village Council care that, for substantially
increased taxes, the residents of Pinewild get nothing that improves
their quality of life? In fact, it may lessen it. How would you
council members feel if it were you?
It is important to note that Pinehurst’s real costs of the
Involuntary Annexation of Pinewild are fairly minimal. Why, you may
ask?
That brings us to the enabling legislation; the archaic North
Carolina General Statutes 160A-45, 47 and 48. The clear intent of
the laws pertaining to Involuntary Annexation is the provision of
services essential for the health, safety and welfare of the annexed
individuals….services like water and sewer and fire protection,
police services and garbage collection.
Water and sewer are mentioned 12 times in the 13 paragraphs
contained in GS 160A-47, (“Pre-requisites to Annexation”). Those
issues are clearly the motivating factors for creation of the 1959
law. Yet Pinewild water and sewer are provided by Moore County, NOT
Pinehurst.
In fact, these services are provided quite adequately in Pinewild
under the current arrangements. For the huge increase in tax,
Pinehurst proposes just to substitute diminished garbage services in
place of our current individual arrangements, and replace the
Sheriff with the Police Department.
The Sept. 2 article stated Pinewild residents could vote and hold
office in Pinehurst. That hardly seems worth $6 million dollars over
the next 5 years. Considering the above, even a generous evaluation
of Pinehurst’s proposed Involuntary Annexation must conclude that it
is motivated by the money.
It has been suggested that Pinewild residents don’t pay their “fair
share.” I don’t know what that really means. If there is an
admission charge at the Fair Barn, we pay it. Pinewild residents
willingly and generously serve on countless community boards and
organizations, including the Library (which is not a Pinehurst
municipal building).
Hardly a civic, social, religious organization or fund-raising
effort exists in Pinehurst that is not widely supported both
financially and personally by residents of Pinewild …the most
generous people I have ever had the pleasure of knowing.
Maybe paying our
“fair share” refers to paying paving the streets of Pinehurst that
we use to go to our volunteer meetings, meet with the congregations
and organizations that we support, and spend our money in the shops
and restaurants of Pinehurst. Should we also be expected to pay for
the streets of Aberdeen and Southern Pines?
The Sept. 2 article stated that Pinehurst uses tax dollars for
protecting Pinewild from adverse land use and development. Pinewild
may benefit, but Pinehurst is doing that for itself – not Pinewild.
Besides, the cost is so insignificant that it’s not even mentioned
as an expense in the Economic Analysis included in Pinehurst’s
Preliminary Annexation Report (dated April 2005).
As for property values; higher taxes affect property values
negatively – not positively. Forest Creek has the highest property
values in this area and it is NOT a part of Pinehurst.
And, the Pinehurst address? The Pinewild community and the Club have
Pinehurst in their address because of the United States Post Office.
It has nothing to do with the Village.
So, where does that leave us? Unfortunately, the Village Council has
been misled for some time regarding the attitude of Pinewild
residents toward Involuntary Annexation. But, the fact is that
nearly 80% of residents DO NOT WANT TO BE INVOLUNTARILY ANNEXED.
Therefore, I would like to now present our Appeal:
“We (the undersigned) appeal to the Village of Pinehurst to cease
present and future procedures to annex the community of Pinewild.
The intent, spirit and purpose of the existing statutes that allow
Involuntary Annexation are to provide annexed communities with
services needed to protect the public health, safety and welfare.
Annexation of Pinewild by Pinehurst will not provide any additional
needed services, and will not materially (change or) improve
protection of health, safety and/or welfare of Pinewild residents.”
This appeal is signed by more than 750 residents and property owners
in Pinewild. Here are the signatures.
Behind me you see a cross-section of Pinewild residents who support
this appeal. The placard that you see was signed this morning by six
dozen more residents who wanted to be here but were committed to a
function planned months ago.
Antiquated North Carolina law may permit Pinehurst to proceed toward
the Involuntarily Annexation of Pinewild. But, please note that THE
LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE IT.
Involuntary Annexation is purely a Village decision.
Today, the Village Council must begin to rethink the morality of
this Involuntary Annexation. Ladies and Gentlemen, we ask you: don’t
listen to the League of Municipalities. Listen to your heart. Listen
to your neighbors.
The message is “No annexation. Leave us alone. We will continue to
be your good neighbors.” "
Respectfully Presented on September 13, 2005
John C. Boesch
|
StopNCAnnexation