GREENVILLE – State regulators wrapped up public hearings on Plum Creek’s Moosehead Lake development plan on Saturday the same way they began them: before a deeply divided crowd of several hundred people in this North Woods community.

During the past seven weeks, regulators have listened patiently as well over 400 people offered their thoughts on whether Plum Creek’s historic proposal represents a pathway to economic revival, environmental disaster, or something in between.

More than 25 hours of testimony later, regulators still have a long road ahead as they grapple with the largest and one of the most controversial development proposals in Maine history.

The public hearings will be followed by technical hearings that could finish as early as Friday, and the Land Use Regulation Commission’s review of the plan is expected to take several months after completion of the technical hearings.

The four public hearings made abundantly clear that Mainers from all backgrounds and regions of the state are deeply and passionately split over a proposal that all sides acknowledge will change the face of Maine’s North Woods.

“I hope there’s a special place in heaven for you,” said one of the last of the 150 or so people to address the Land Use Regulation Commission on Saturday.

Proponents and critics of Plum Creek’s plan were nearly equally represented among those who spoke during Saturday’s hearing, held at Greenville High School. Speakers reiterated many of the themes heard at the three previous hearings.

Supporters predict Plum Creek’s plan for 975 house lots, two resorts and more than 400,000 acres of conservation will create jobs and promote tourism while permanently protecting the region’s natural beauty.

Opponents, meanwhile, argue the luxury homes and vaguely defined resorts could spoil the wilderness quality of the area, thereby undermining the backbone of an already ailing economy.

Saturday’s hearing did help illuminate regional differences of opinion, however.

The vast majority of residents who testified strongly urged LURC to approve some version of Plum Creek’s plan.

Diane Bartley said locals are not so naive as to think Plum Creek’s proposal will solve all of the region’s problems, which include above-average poverty rates, shrinking schools and hospitals struggling with too few patients. But the plan offers a good balance of growth and protection, she said.

“I hope you will listen to the local people,” Bartley said.

Other locals reminded the commissioners of the heyday of the region’s tourist economy, when 500 or more people could stay at Hotel Kineo alone and dozens of steamships plied Moosehead Lake.

While Plum Creek’s plan probably wouldn’t bring back such times, supporters said, it would create much-needed jobs while guaranteeing public access to about 430,000 acres in the area.

“I believe the plan will give people hope and the confidence to move to Greenville,” said Joe DiAngelo, who has worked seven different jobs to support his family since moving to Greenville.

But for almost every supporter who spoke Saturday, there was someone who urged LURC to reject Plum Creek’s plan.

Loren Ritchie said he loves his community. A retired educator who graduated from Greenville High School, Ritchie said he supports and volunteers at the local school system and literally owes his life to C.A. Dean Memorial Hospital in Greenville. But he is unconvinced Plum Creek’s plan would bring positive changes.

“I just can’t find it in me to support this proposal,” Ritchie said.

Others sought to cast doubt on the benevolence of Plum Creek’s conservation proposal and, instead, portrayed the company as a money-hungry corporation with little regard for the local community or environment.

Stephen Perkins of Sangerville was among several speakers who criticized Plum Creek for proposing subdivisions and a 250-accommodation resort on Lily Bay north of Greenville. Perkins, who owns a camp on the bay, predicted the development would spoil his camp and nearby Lily Bay State Park.

“Are you willing to trade the call of the loon for the ring of the cash register?” Perkins said. “Say no to Plum Creek.”

LURC will resume its enormous review of Plum Creek’s proposal on Tuesday as commissioners, staff and interested parties continue to probe the details of the plan during a fourth week of technical hearings.

Catherine Carroll, LURC’s director, said the commission hopes to finish the technical hearings by Friday, but she left the door open for future meetings should Plum Creek propose additional changes.

No other public hearings are planned at this time, but the public record likely will remain open for a month after the technical hearings are complete, she said.

Speaking Saturday evening, Carroll said she was extremely pleased with the civility and respect both sides demonstrated during the public hearings.

“My impression is the people who testified took this very seriously and took time to craft their arguments,” Carroll said. “And I found most of the comments to be very constructive.”

In an unprecedented move, LURC asked for a heavy police presence at all of the hearings. Plum Creek officials, who have been the targets of vandalism and threats because of the development plan, also were guarded by a team of ever-present private security guards.

Luke Muzzy, Plum Creek’s senior land asset manager and one of the key architects of the development plan, said he too was pleased with the tone of the hearings.

kmiller@bangordailynews.net

990-8250