Londonderry discusses future of Williams Dam

Londonderry, Vt.

LONDONDERRY, Vt. – The Londonderry Selectboard briefly reviewed the process to appoint a new town clerk to fill the vacancy of recently resigned Kelly Pajala at the Aug. 19 meeting, and largely discussed the future of the Williams Dam.

Resident Chad Stoddard questioned the legitimacy of currently having two assistant town clerks, Jennifer Lawrence and Allison Marino, saying there were no warnings or announcements of the appointments, and it seemed “shady.” Stoddard continued, asking if Lawrence was leaving or not, and expressed that she has been trained for two months and should therefore be taking over the town clerk position.

Board Chair Tom Cavanagh stated that the selectboard has no authority over the town clerk, or their appointment of assistants as they see fit.

Board member Taylor Prouty explained that Lawrence had no intention of taking the town clerk position, as she was unsure if she was going to be moving, and therefore may not remain in her current assistant position. Pajala appointed a second assistant, Marino, to fill any void to cover her position and possibly Lawrence’s. The town clerk position still needed to be filled by one of the applicants, Marino and Robert Gray.

Cavanagh said the board can appoint a town clerk to fill the vacant position, and have the town elect the individual in March at the annual Town Meeting.

The board then discussed the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant program options, flood proofing or elevation, for two business owners and one residential property owner. Applicant Beverly Jelley of Jelley’s Deli stated, “We’re very important to this town,” and wanted all the information she could get before making a decision on what to do with her property.

Cavanagh moved to discuss recommendations for the future of the Williams Dam. The state analysis showed that if the town removed the dam, it wouldn’t do anything for the downtown center, but “with other options we’re looking to do, we have a fighting chance,” Cavanagh said. “With the dam, we might as well not even try, it’s going to flood.” He expressed that he felt the fire department would be the main reason of concern to keep the dam. He recommended putting up a plaque to acknowledge the history of the dam, and to remove it.

Ron Rhodes, director of programs for the Connecticut River Conservancy, explained the removal cost is around $10,000, compared to what could be a $300,000 project. He also confirmed that the removal could include a sister replacement, which would essentially be a concrete tank on the edge of the river to allow water to flow in, sized comparatively to be able to fill a fire truck, while also holding overflow in the event of a higher flow or flooding situation.

Board member Martha Dale asked if they could put the sister replacement in place before removing the dam, preventing themselves from being “vulnerable.” Rhodes explained the removal would have to happen first to be able to move forward with the next plan of action.

Resident Bob Forbes voiced his concern about the historic preservation of the dam, expressing that he didn’t think it was in such a state of disrepair. Equipped with photos and documents, he was very passionate about attempting to repair the dam. “I’m not sure it’s going to take big dollars to maintain it,” he said.

Forbes debated with Cavanagh about its functionality. Cavanagh stated, “It’s a gate that will not reduce flooding at all.” Forbes countered that it never had a purpose to reduce flooding. He urged the town to make a better evaluation of what needs to be done to keep the dam intact.

“How much money do you want to spend on this dam?” Cavanagh questioned. Forbes countered, “You’re making an assumption on how much money it’s going to be.” He expressed that a budget and list of repairs were recommended by the state without knowing what actually needed to be done, adding the dam has been there for over 250 years, and survived four or five 100-year floods.

Cavanagh expressed, though he also cares about the history of the dam, the town has been advised that “the dam is in dire need of repair…I’m sorry, it’s time to do something.” The town is opting to remove the dam or to replace it. He reiterated that the state will not allow dredging of the pond behind the dam, as silt will continue to build up at the dam. They can only dredge, which would help slow a high flow of water, if they remove the dam. Removal would also not impact the town downstream any differently than if the dam remained in place, though it reduce flooding in that area.

Rhodes said, “You’re never going to have an engineer say ‘you’ll never flood again,’” but explained other processes they can do to help reduce the possibility. In addition to removal of the dam, they can create wetland floodplain areas along the river, engineering it to move more slowly, to help prevent major floods.

Rhodes provided an example of a floodplain restoration project recently done in Plymouth, where they lowered the elevation level of a river bank, allowing the river to flow into the floodplain areas, which gives the water more room to spread out and slow down during a higher flow. Part of that project is to seed, mulch, and plant trees and shrubbery that will help absorb and slow water further.

Cavanagh concurred there were many places in town, even in Weston, where they could create similar floodplain areas before the river gets to downtown Londonderry. He expressed that “some difference is better than no difference…I didn’t build this town on a river, [but] I’m trying to save this town on a river.”

Rhodes noted that even if the town voted that evening to move forward with the project, it would take three to five years to obtain the federal money. But he cautioned, if they wait five years to make a decision, the federal funds would no longer be available, and the town would solely be relying on state funding, which will mean less money.

New board member James Ameden Jr. agreed with Dale, expressing that they would like to know the structure of the dam and get more information before making a decision. The topic was tabled.

The board will meet on the second and fourth Mondays in September, in observance of Labor Day, and will return to the first and third Mondays in October.

Back To Top