Columbia Falls moratorium vote places pause on flagpole project

During their March 21 annual town meeting, Columbia Falls residents overwhelmingly voted to approve the much-discussed moratorium on large-scale commercial development that will in effect place a pause on the $1 billion Flagpole of Freedom Park project proposed by the Worcester family. A total of 63 people were in favor of instituting the 180-day moratorium, with 17 opposed. This is a mirror image of earlier survey results of residents, with 80% of respondents in favor of the moratorium.
The almost year-long effort to institute a moratorium was placed before the town after a number of informational meetings and the survey to garner residents' input. The moratorium places a pause on commercial, industrial or nonresidential development that is greater than 100 feet in height or disturbs three or more acres of land and also on high-density residential development.
Speaking on behalf of the effort, attorney Aga Dixon, who leads the legal team overseeing the moratorium effort, will now assist the town to develop a land use and large-scale development strategy. Other members of that team are attorney Amanda Methot and land use planning consultant Noel Musson. "Town officials were very happy to see the high turnout of Columbia Falls voters for last night's town meeting and their support of the proposed moratorium ordinance and all other items on the agenda," says Dixon.
It has been stated numerous times by both town officials and the consulting team that this is not about one large-scale project such as the Flagpole of Freedom Park (FFP) but about the absence of any land use or large-scale development parameters in the town's current comprehensive plan. "This town is not well positioned and is currently in total reactive mode," Dixon said back in October. "Setting aside the flagpole project, this town could have a landowner or business propose some fairly large-scale development and the town would have very little ability to consider its impact on the community. It's a risk that the town is taking on with every day that it doesn't have a robust regulatory framework in place."
Many residents and people in the surrounding area, though, posit the primary reason for the moratorium is the FFP project first unveiled in March 2022. The project would feature the tallest flagpole in the world with six history museums, a nine-mile memorial wall holding the names of every veteran, hotel, shops and restaurants. It would utilize over 2,500 acres and require significant infrastructure investment to support the project. It would also require the town to annex 10,400 acres of Worcester-owned land from the unorganized territories.
Public opinion on the project reveals both support for and direct opposition. While Washington County is considered the poorest county in the state, proponents say the venture would bring jobs and much-needed business to the area's business establishments. Opponents use that same narrative to point to the strain a project of that size would have on an infrastructure already lacking sound roads, housing and available people to work.
On March 17, just before the town meeting, the Worcester family, who have been mostly silent since requesting a pause in the annexation process back in early August, issued a statement. Mike Worcester indicated that the family is returning donations it had received to start the project and that it had taken down the donation page on the project's website. No further reasons or financial disclosures were offered.
In response to the town's bid for a moratorium, Worcester added: "Although it may end up delaying our progress with Flagpole of Freedom, we support the town in protecting itself from unrestricted growth. This goes for our project or any other projects entering the area."
In August the Worcester family requested the town take a pause on its annexation due diligence. The reasons for the pause were at first ambiguous, but later as the pause timeframe lengthened the project's attorney, Tim Pease, said in October that they were reevaluating the project due to governance and fundraising issues and that a number of veteran organizations had pushed back on the project's for-profit business status.

Permitting requirements eyed
Two key items the moratorium team was concerned with involve assurance in permitting requirements that developers can financially complete a project once started and have the financial wherewithal to "deconstruct" or decommission a project if it fails.
"A town does not want a project half built with a developer then saying they are out of funds and cannot complete it," Methot said at a public information session held on March 7. "Consequently, should a project be completed and fail, there should be a decommissioning element contained in the approved plan to prevent a developer from simply walking away and leaving the burden on the town."
The only substantial change in the moratorium since it was first drafted back in December is that its effective date is now March 21, not December 13. The moratorium will run for 180 days and can be renewed one time without a town vote.
The reason for the date change was to allow a pre-existing town approved project - an RV park -- to move forward. The project had stalled due to numerous delays by the Department of Environmental Protection. The project would have been curtailed further if the moratorium start date held to when it was first drafted. The town's select board felt it would not have been fair to the developer.
"It is now time to begin the hard work of developing a robust and considered framework for evaluating the appropriateness of large-scale development in the town," says Dixon. "We will continue to engage the residents and visitors of the community and seek their thoughts throughout the process. Ultimately, the voters will be asked to adopt any new or amended ordinances at a future town meeting."