Environmental Protection Committee Gives Plum Creek Low Approval Reply

At the 8/5/2014 meeting, EPAC Chairwoman, Mary Alford asked board members to list positives and negatives about the PLUM CREEK initiative.

The negative side is interesting and lists PLAN EAST GAINESVILLE (PEG) as a loser. (EPAC Meeting Agenda –  PDF)

EPAC Plum Creek List - GOOD and BAD.EPAC – Agenda August 5, 2014

It was asserted that opinions expressed by the participants in Plum Creek visioning meetings, alone, make the case for this negative assessment.

One example is comments by GRU’s Ed Regan.

    “This is a chance to build a safe community in terms of crime and all that sort of stuff. It’s a real important part of urban design, and we made some mistakes in that regard in Gainesville”

“A chance to make the whole thing more liveable, affordable and comfortable”
— Ed Regan, GRU

Ed Regan’s comments speak more to a utopian concept where Plum Creek is walled-off from the failed “urban design” and crime in East Gainesville.  But Regan makes a valid point about “affordability”, since Plum Creek will avoid the high GRU/GREC Biomass rates with Clay Electric designated as the main energy provider. (Video)

The district historically identified as the target for Plan East Gainesville (PEG) has little to do with the visioning expectations for Plum Creek made by stakeholders – most of whom do not even live in East Gainesville.

Instead, Plum Creek Visioning participants of “means” look forward to an entirely new community, not intended to be identified with PEG where the largely black populations have been betrayed by false promises from City leaders for decades.

It’s finally becoming apparent to District 1 voters that the long delayed promises of PEG – like Plum Creek – has repeatedly been used to hijack elections through pressure tactics applied by political party operatives.


For and Against Plum CreekCounty Commission Democrat hopeful, Kevin Thorpe is endorsed by GRU/GREC $3 Billion PPA contract visionary, Pegeen Hanrahan.  This is an odd-couple considering the biomass contract has inflicted the highest electric rates in the State on Gainesville’s most economically challenged District 1 voters.

Kevin Thorpe Campaign Card with Hanrahan

Thorpe campaign card endorsed by pro-Plum Creek elitist, Pegeen Hanrahan

Candidate, Ken Cornell “MY STANCE ON PLUM CREEK”

We can’t afford to let one of the United States’ largest landowners (Plum Creek Inc.) change the direction of our County by eliminating many protections that safeguard our environment. To build a new city – 12 miles east of east Gainesville, east of Newnan’s Lake on an already impaired watershed – will pull valuable investments from existing municipalities where taxpayers live and work. Our Comprehensive Plan, reflecting decades of participation by the general public, allows for targeted development around our existing municipalities to foster real jobs while protecting the strategic ecosystem on which we all depend.

Alachua County citizens deserve a commissioner who listens, learns, and then works to accomplish our shared goals. I will always put the people of Alachua County first over any corporation. (website)

Ken Cornell CampaignCornell – the pick of the Sierra Club environmentalists, specifically promises to protect the County’s Comprehensive plan.

A recent mail-out by the “Stand by Our Plan” citizen group describes the issues at stake:

Plum Creek Mailer8/16/2014: Plum Creek Full page ad appears in SUN promising to usurp Alachua County’s authority to determine for future land use and growth management.

Plum Creek Full Page Ad SUN 8-16-2014



Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s