June 5, 2026
The County Pulled a Bait and Switch
On Friday, June 5, 2026, the Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works (DPW) formally announced its decision to proceed with the Moose Lodge property (Site E) for the Heritage Harbour Elevated Water Storage Tank. The announcement came in a letter from DPW Director Karen Henry to the community.
This is the very site our community organized against for over a year. The site that 300+ residents signed our petition to oppose. The site that puts homes in the fall zone of a 200-foot industrial tower. The site that would loom over neighborhood homes, playgrounds, and yards. The site that residents have documented would cost them tens of millions in lost property value. The site that scored worst on DPW’s own visual impact analysis. The site that residents specifically rejected in the County’s own survey.
It is also the site our coalition had reason to believe was being removed from consideration after the County paused acquisition in October 2025 and conducted a full public re-evaluation.
The data the County collected and then ignored.
In December 2025, the County released the full results of the community survey conducted in November. The data was clear:
47% of respondents ranked Impact to Personal Property Values as their #1 priority.
Site L (open space off North River Road) received over four times the first-choice support of any other site (137 first-place votes compared to 31 for the next-closest site).
Site E was the second-choice site, but received less than a quarter of the support Site L did.
DPW’s own technical review rated Site E as “Moderate-High” visual impact, the worst rating among all seven sites under consideration.
The County asked the community what mattered most. The community answered. The County then selected the site that fails on every metric the community identified.
The letter also refers to the opposition not as the 300+ petition signers from Twin Hills, Ashers Farm, The Ridges, Crownsville Road, Heritage Harbour, and surrounding communities, but only as “those living directly adjacent to the Annapolis Moose Lodge.” This characterization diminishes a year of organized advocacy by multiple neighborhoods into a small adjacent group, and is itself part of the documentary record this coalition is now compiling.
The County’s stated justification raises more questions than it answers.
In its announcement, DPW described Site E as “the most fiscally responsible option for utility rate payers.” This claim has not yet been substantiated with a published comparative cost analysis. Our coalition will be filing Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) requests this week to compel the County to produce that analysis, along with internal communications related to the decision and any documents identifying private developer interest in the alternative sites.
We will also be requesting all correspondence between DPW and the City of Annapolis regarding Site L, the community’s preferred location, which sits on city-owned land.
The letter also discloses, for the first time, that Site L was ruled out for “critical hydraulic constraints and high construction costs.” These concerns were never raised during the year-long public process. The community was asked to rank Site L on the survey. Site L was presented as a viable option at the open houses. The County’s March and April 2026 updates described Site L as still under active consideration. If these technical concerns existed, the County either knew about them and chose not to disclose them — or never properly evaluated Site L before presenting it to the public as a serious option. Either possibility undermines the integrity of the entire public engagement process.
What comes next.
Our coalition is escalating to the next phase of advocacy. This is no longer a campaign of letters and public meetings. It is moving into the courthouse.
We are filing MPIA requests to compel transparency about how this decision was actually made.
We are consulting with Maryland legal counsel about a potential injunction to halt the County’s acquisition of the Moose Lodge property.
We are preparing an arbitrary-and-capricious legal challenge to the site selection itself. Maryland law allows a court to reverse an agency decision that is not based on consideration of relevant factors. DPW invited the public to identify the relevant factors. The community did. DPW then made a decision that violated every factor it had asked the public to identify.
We are organizing additional community testimony and pressing County leadership in writing.
The fight is not over.
When this coalition formed in 2025, we were told that fighting county government was a waste of time. We proved otherwise. We forced the County to pause, listen, and conduct a survey. That was a real victory.
What we did not anticipate is that the County would conduct that process and then disregard its results. That is what happened, and we are not prepared to let it stand.
If you have stood with us for the past year, we need you with us now more than ever. The legal phase of this fight is significantly more expensive than the public-advocacy phase has been. Every donation funds the legal battle ahead. Every signature on our petition strengthens our standing in the legal case. Every email sent to County leadership creates the political pressure that the legal pressure depends on.
This is not the outcome we wanted. It is the outcome we will fight.
March & April, 2026
County Updates Reveal Stalled Progress on Site Selection
Following our direct follow-up in March, the Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works (DPW) sent out email updates on March 19th and again on April 20th. While we appreciate the communication, these updates were nearly identical, revealing a concerning lack of concrete progress in the site selection process.
Key points from the County’s repeated communications:
•Site L Status: The County states they are still “in discussions with property owners regarding potential land acquisition,” including Site L (our community’s top choice). This means that months after Site L was presented as a viable option at public meetings, the County is still trying to determine if the land is even available for purchase or lease. Preliminary engineering assessments for Site L have not yet begun.
•Site E (Moose Lodge) Remains on the Table – Despite the overwhelming community mandate for Site L and the clear rejection of the Moose Lodge in the December survey, the County continues to refuse to formally remove Site E from consideration. Their updates reiterate that the final determination will depend on a “comprehensive evaluation” of costs, hydraulic modeling, and public input.
•Communication Gaps Persist. While the County promised regular email updates, these two almost identical emails are the only communications many residents have received since December. Furthermore, the official County project website has not been updated in over four months, creating a significant transparency gap.
Our Take: The repeated, identical updates from the County are deeply concerning. It appears the process has stalled, with no real movement on confirming Site L’s availability or eliminating the highly unpopular Moose Lodge site. We find it disappointing that after so much community engagement and clear feedback, the County is still at the very initial stage of property owner discussions for Site L. We will continue to advocate for a transparent, timely, and responsive process that honors the community’s clear preference and prevents us from being forced back to square one with the Moose Lodge.
December, 2025
A Data-Driven Path Forward
The Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works has officially released the full results of the community survey conducted in November. The data provides a powerful and clear mandate for the path forward, confirming two key points our coalition has been making for months:
1.Site L is the Overwhelming Community Choice: The survey shows a massive preference for Site L (the open space off North River Road), which received over four times the support of any other location. The Moose Lodge site (Site E) was not a preferred option.
2.Protecting Property Values is the #1 Priority: When asked what matters most in selecting a site, nearly half of all respondents chose “Impact to Personal Property Values” as their top priority.
This is a major victory for our community and a direct result of your engagement. The County’s own data now validates our core arguments. In response, our coalition has sent a formal letter to the Director of Public Works and our County Council representatives. The letter thanks them for the transparent survey process and respectfully urges them to honor the community’s clear feedback by focusing their final evaluation on Site L and publicly confirming that the Moose Lodge site will not be pursued.
Full Survey Results (PDF)
October, 2025
Our Advocacy Forces a Public Re-evaluation
After a relentless summer campaign of emails, phone calls, and meetings with county and state officials, our coalition successfully forced the County to pause its acquisition of the Moose Lodge property and restart the site selection process. This victory culminated in two public open house meetings where, for the first time, the County presented a range of alternative sites for public consideration.
Hundreds of residents attended over the two days to learn about the seven viable sites and to make their voices heard directly to County officials. The County also launched a two-week community-wide survey to gather feedback on location preferences—a direct result of our demands for a more structured and data-driven feedback mechanism. The strong turnout sent a clear message: our community is organized, engaged, and will not be ignored.
July, 2025
Coalition Statement Outlines Unresolved Issues
As the summer advocacy campaign intensified, the coalition released a formal statement summarizing the community’s unresolved concerns. This statement, sent to County officials and the media, detailed the flawed public process, fiscal irresponsibility, and the County’s continued neglect of superior alternatives. Key points included:
•Transparency Violations: The statement highlighted the invalid public notice for the March meeting, the County’s significant delays in responding to Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) requests, and unresolved conflict of interest concerns.
•Fiscal Irresponsibility: The coalition exposed the inflated project costs, the excessive price being offered for the Moose Lodge land (more than double its assessed value), and the County’s double standard in appraising damages for the Moose Lodge but not for neighboring residents.
•Neglect of Alternatives: The statement reiterated the County’s deviation from its own 2022 Master Plan and the admission from DPW that the Moose Lodge was chosen for convenience, not merit.
This formal statement served as a critical turning point, consolidating all our arguments into a single, powerful document and demonstrating that our opposition was organized, fact-based, and relentless. It was shortly after this that the County pledged greater transparency and agreed to reschedule the public meeting for the fall.
May-June 2025
Community Unites and Fights Back
Outraged by the flawed and non-transparent process, a dedicated group of residents from Twin Hills, Ashers Farm, The Ridges, Heritage Harbour, and surrounding communities formed the Stop the Tower Annapolis Coalition. Hundreds of neighbors quickly joined the cause by signing the petition, creating a powerful, unified voice for our community.
Registered as a 501(c)(4) organization, the coalition immediately launched an intensive advocacy campaign. We retained professional legal and government relations counsel to ensure our rights were protected and our voice was effective. Our leadership team initiated a constant stream of communication with the County Executive’s office, the DPW Director, and members of the County Council. We held meetings with state senators and delegates to ensure our concerns were understood at every level of government.
Our message was clear: the community deserved a fair, transparent, and data-driven process. We demanded a halt to the Moose Lodge acquisition and a full, public evaluation of less impactful alternatives. This sustained pressure throughout the summer is what ultimately led to the County reversing course and agreeing to the October public meetings.
March 25, 2025
A “Done Deal” Approach Sparks a Community Uprising
The County held its first public meeting to inform residents about the proposed water tower, but it was clear this was not a genuine consultation. The project was presented as a “done deal,” with the County planning to acquire the Moose Lodge property by June 2025. The process was flawed from the very beginning, as the public notices mailed to residents contained the wrong address, a violation of the Open Meetings Act that hindered public awareness.
At this meeting, the community learned the shocking details of the plan:
•A Massive, Intrusive Structure: The plan was to build a 200-foot industrial water tower—taller than the 181-foot Maryland State House—looming over our homes, parks, and playgrounds.
•Devastating Financial Impact: Real estate professionals warned that property values could decline by 15-20%, representing millions in lost home equity for our community.
•A Flawed, Non-Transparent Process: The County had been negotiating with the Moose Lodge for 18 months and had an accepted offer five months before the first public meeting. They ignored their own 2022 Master Plan, which identified the Broad Creek site, and the advice of their own 2015 consultant who warned of the visual impact of the Moose Lodge location.
•No Data, No Justification: The County provided no property value impact studies, no environmental analyses, and no health assessments. They failed to demonstrate the necessity of the project, as residents reported no water service problems, and they refused to provide a comparative analysis of cheaper, less intrusive alternatives like modern booster pump systems.
The community left this meeting outraged but organized. It was this flawed and disrespectful process that sparked the formation of our coalition and the beginning of our successful fight for a fair process and a better solution.