What’s good for the future of Moore County, they implied during the council work session, may not be good for the village of Pinehurst.
Mayor Pro Tem George Hillier said a May 16 presentation, in which Whitley discussed the EDC’s strategic and economic development plan for the county, left the village leaders “with some real concerns about what’s in it for us.”
The village has contributed $44,000 to the EDC, with an additional outlay of $22,000 approved in the 2001-2002 budget.
Council Member John Glynn, the village’s representative to the Chamber, said the council is concerned that the thrust of the May 16 meeting seemed to be the division of the county’s population.
“It was viewed very negatively (by the village), and the presentation was not very impressive,” Glynn said. “It seemed to be premised on the idea that the population of Moore County is in danger of being segmented into two groups:one being older and higher-incomed and more educated, and the other younger with a lower income and less educated.
“The question this raised with us is, is it true? And secondly, if it is true, is this bad? When you consider the fact that the principal industries in this area are golf and the hospital, they do have a lot of low-paying jobs, but those are the strengths of this area economically.”
Glynn also said that even though the economic development plan was indeed presented as a plan, “Personally, I don’t see it as a plan.”
He cited the plan’s proposed marketing budget of $200,000 the first year, as well as plans to build an industrial and office park, but added that there has been no input as to the type of “payoff” that would be received from these outlays.
Whitley admitted that a mistake had been made in referring to a “plan,” and that a more apt word would have been “proposal.’
He added that the “proposal” — which is based on demographic research compiled by an outside consulting agency — is a work in progress that still needs much consideration and input by all segments of the county.
“We felt the process needed to be data-driven and that we needed an objective party to come in and help us understand what is the nature of our economy, where it’s going and how we can fix it,” Whitley said. “This is a Moore County all-inclusive initiative. It’s not up to me or the Chamber of Commerce to say whether we take action or not. It’s up to the elected officials and the folks who put them there.”
The plan is also the product of input from residents of the county who don’t share the same economic background and hopes for the future as the residents of the village, Whitley said.
Whitley pointed to the county’s influx of Hispanics looking for manufacturing-based jobs that offer health benefits, which means attracting more industry to the Sandhills — a move that many fear would destroy the ambience of the village.
“Many of these folks came here due to work in agriculture or in manufacturing such as the Perdue plant,” Whitley said. “The problem is that they probably won’t be working in agriculture in the next five years. Where are they going to go? We’ve lost 20 to 25 percent of the manufacturing jobs in the county, and the next major exodus will be in the furniture industry.
“Our job is to hear the total interests of the county. We can’t do it without your participation and support. We need you.”
Council member Virginia Fallon echoed Whitley, saying she sees the economic interconnection between the village and the rest of Moore County.
“We want to see the county do well,” Fallon said. “We are not isolationists. But I do believe the presentation was very bad.”
Council member George Hill took exception to Whitley’s comparison of Moore County to a “rudderless ship” that needed guidance.
“I think resorts would argue that we’re not rudderless,” Hill said. “We’ve had the U.S. Men’s Open, and we just had the U.S. Women’s Open. Someone had to guide those events.”
In other action, Pinehurst Community Appearance Commission Chairman Ed Bartley expressed dissatisfaction with a recent suggestion by Mayor Steve Smith that term limits be placed on CAC members.
Bartley said that it is difficult to find qualified CAC board members and that term limits would only make the task “tougher.”
“The hardest job I have is identifying and recruiting qualified people,” Bartley said. “If you do go to term limits, you’re going to have recruiting problems. I don’t see a long line of people waiting to be on the CAC.”
Smith, who was not present at Tuesday’s meeting, had said at the June 8 regular work session that he would like for the council to further discuss the idea of imposing term limits for all of the village’s voluntary boards at the July 12 work session.
In addition to his opposition to term limits, Bartley also expressed dissatisfaction with the working relationship between the CAC and the village’s Planning and Inspections Department.
“We’ve always worked well together, but I can’t say that’s the case today,” Bartley said. “There are issues that Susan [Planning Director Susan Harrison-Brown] and I need to work out. Our relationship is pretty tenuous.”
Several council members advised that the work session was not the “time or place” to air such grievances. Bartley will meet with Brown today to discuss their differences, with Village Manager Andy Wilkison serving as a mediator.
