My name is David E. Bruderly, professional engineer and long-term resident of Alachua County. I am one of the few people in my opinion - there are only 3 or 4 of us in this room - who sat through most of the late night EAR meetings that were integral to the very, very public process of crafting this Comprehensive Plan Amendment that was adopted by the commission on April 8, 2002. This was a prolonged and painful public process.

Something that has been overlooked by everybody who is praising the proposed Settlement Agreement as being a glorious compromise, is the fact that many, many compromises were made during this very public EAR process by those who participated in that process. Jim Parrish and I and Barry Rutenburg and others were sitting in the back of the room asking each other: "What does this really mean? What's this going to do?"

We also sought to protect private property rights and developers and builders who had projects in progress. We asked the question "How do we do what is in the community interest and avoid stepping on the toes of those folks who might have a business plan in place to develop a particular parcel and avoid putting them out of business within the next five year time frame." I might add that some of these discussions happened over five years ago. It was a long term process; but it was a very public and open process.

There was a lot of blood, sweat and tears that went into trying to craft a professional comprehensive plan that

• 1) was defensible under the community standards of the state as well as this community;
• 2) would serve the public interest;
• 3) would protect the private property rights of property owners;
• 4) would still be effective in preserving open space and the rural character of the County.

There is no shortage of land in Alachua County for people who want to build new homes; nor is there a shortage of opportunities to re-develop land that has already been despoiled. I came away from the EAR process convinced that we don't need to continue chewing up our open space. If you look at the amount of land already defined by Comp Plans and available for development within the City of Newberry and the City of Alachua, you will see that there is no shortage of open land available and ready to develop in Alachua County. In addition, there is a lot of open land within the City of Gainesville ready to develop as well as ample property ready to be re-developed.

The April 8, 2002 Comp Plan will not take jobs away from people who need jobs as carpenters and bricklayers and masons. Those jobs will still be created because population growth in Alachua County is not going to be affected by the details of the April 2002 version of our Comprehensive Plan.

In my opinion, this proposed Settlement Agreement serves the marketing people. It is trying to anticipate what the people who move here from other places want. I say to you, let's give them the Gainesville Experience; let's tell show everybody that we have a high quality community -- and that we intend to keep it that way. If people want to move here from Detroit, let them buy what this community has to offer them -- but let us protect our community values. Whether the project is a Wal-Mart Super Center or a simple subdivision, let's do what Aspin, Colorado does -- which is set a high standard for development that protect community values -- and then let's hold to that standard.

Let's not just throw away a 3 1/2 year very public, painful process -- in which many people from all sides of these issues participated -- in favor of a proposed Settlement Agreement that was not a public process. The Settlement Agreement was a mediation. The mediation process can be a very good method to settle a divorce or resolve some other contractual dispute between two or three people. But using mediation to bypass an open, public planning process that affects tens of thousands of people is simply not fair; it removes any element of objectivity and professional accountability.

I trust your professional staff. Let your staff defend the Comprehensive Plan that was adopted on April 8, 2002 and let the chips fall where they may . I hate the idea of litigation on both sides, but you're going to get litigation either way. Let the chips fall where they may and protect the integrity of the planning process. You as elected officials have the duty, I think, to protect the integrity of public participation. Don't throw that away just because some lawyers in a smoke-filled room -- well, no smoke anymore -- but some lawyers got together in a private setting and hammered out something they thought their clients could agree to while the rest of us were not there.

Thank you very much.

David E. Bruderly, PE