The phrase that galled me the most was, “Today Pinewild residents travel on village-maintained streets and sidewalks, bank, shop, go to the Post Office and recreate in Pinehurst.” That was followed by the fact that most of that was provided by village taxpayers.

I have to say what with Rosa Parks just passing away and her incredible contribution to civil rights and the power of the pocketbook fresh in my mind, I see a response to these arrogant “leaders” of the village. In no way would I equate the oppression of Pinewild with the oppression of Rosa Parks and her entire race, but I do see a potential similarity in our response to it.

Hey, if they don’t like us using their roads, we won’t. There’s plenty of restaurants, ice cream and clothing stores and bank branches outside the village. Let them do without us for awhile and see if our buying power has any effect. And if you’re worried about the cost of the gas to drive a few extra miles, consider what the increase in your taxes will be per year for nothing back. Tell the village how you feel: What’s that’s sound? It’s Southern Pines calling our names.

Peter Mulcahy

Pinehurst

Can you believe that a reason for annexation is to provide Pinewilders with a consolidated yard debris removal service to offset the need for do-it-yourself? This bonus will purportedly benefit Pinewilders who have only phone, electricity, water, sewage, garbage, cable, satellite, mail, fire and police services. Suggesting that yard debris removal tilts the service need to annexation would be humorous were the village not serious.

Can you believe that a reason for annexation is that 660 Pinewild families trod the streets of the village without paying for their maintenance? Overlooked are the 45,000 U.S. Open guests, all our year-round golf visitors and our adjoining neighbors who visit and are welcomed — not taxed. Also unrecognized is the substantial volunteer effort that Pinewild families contribute to the Pinehurst community through assisting at the hospital, our churches and civic organizations.

If the village is serious in its call for everyone to take a “global view” for Pinehurst, it should embrace the 51- family community of Jackson Hamlet — bordered on three sides by Pinehurst. This is the neighbor whose serious sewage problems have been covered in The Pilot and The N.Y. Times (June 7), unveiling to a national audience in detail how Pinehurst conveniently ignores the needs of those who labor for Pinehurst (“In County Made Rich by Golf, Some Enclaves Are Left Behind”).

The village should readjust its moral, fiscal and global compasses.

There can be no credibility in asserting the necessity of imposing annexation on Pinewild, citing yard debris removal as a key rationale element and not exerting diligent effort to annex a community that needs fundamental services that many of us take for granted.

Willy Campbell

I think that we in Pinewild have wronged them. Let us stay out of Pinehurst to save on the wear and tear of their streets. Maybe the residents of Southern Pines, West End, Seven Lakes and Forest Creek will also help them out. I expect the toll gates will soon go up to get some money from them too. Of course, Forest Creek is a future hostile annexation target.

It comes down to the fact that what the village board wants is our tax money. They do not plan to earn it by providing us with anything we do not have now. I challenge the board to list what they will provide us that we do not already have, and are paying for. If they cannot do that, explain what economic burden we are placing on them that is not offset by the economic benefits we provide their merchants.

If they cannot do either, they should drop their annexation plans or wear eye patches like honest pirates.

Joe Owen

Even when you attempt to justify your takeover of Pinewild, your justification is as phony as a three-dollar bill. Pinewild wants leaders who have a better grasp of what is transpiring than what your November Village Newsletter indicates.

If you are going to think “globally,” then I suggest Southern Pines annex Pinehurst because of their abundance of water. Yes, I am being facetious, but if you are concerned about the “whole community,” then I propose we have one government entity and not the many fiefdoms we currently have in Moore County. I am proposing a county government.

This would save the county taxpayers millions of dollars. If you want big, let’s go for the whole enchilada. You don’t care for this proposal? Then you are reacting to my proposal as Pinewild is reacting to Pinehurst annexing Pinewild. My proposal saves dollars.

By not annexing Pinewild, it would actually increase your property values, (supply-demand). This would conform to what you have always stated as an objective: The preservation of Pinehurst.

What will we be receiving for our increase in taxes (on average about $1,000)? Nothing, nada. I would rather pay a toll for the use of your streets. How many households are just “dying” to be annexed by Pinehurst? The answer, none.

Great leaders do what is right, not what they may be able to get away with “legally.” Pinehurst does not have the kind of leadership that meets this test.

Ralph Redmond