Members of the Rangeley Haley Pond Committee on an unspecified date reviewed the condition of the Hailey Pond dam and gate, agreed to gather field measurements to establish an engineered baseline for the pond level, and discussed funding options for repairs and automation.

The committee heard that recent photographs show timber deterioration and a small gap at the gate, and that long‑running volunteer maintenance has left uncertainty about the gate’s intended resting elevation. Committee member Ned said he remembered the pond being higher for decades and urged restoration to the historic level: “For 30 years, it was at this level,” he said, describing rings on rocks and long‑term local memory as the basis for that view. Members agreed that an engineer or surveyor should verify the correct elevation and that the committee should collect quick, coordinated measurements to inform that survey.

Staff reported outreach to Maine’s Submerged Lands program (Maine Department of Conservation), which had no record of the Swiss Way dam; staff also said they had contacted the Department of Transportation right‑of‑way office and were awaiting a callback. The committee noted an attempted contact with Inland Fisheries (one regional contact named Alex Adams was reported to be on furlough and not available immediately). Committee members agreed to invite state dam‑safety staff (BEMA dam‑safety) to the next meeting on Dec. 2 to review the site and discuss technical benchmarks.

Committee staff said a trial transfer of day‑to‑day operational control is already underway from wastewater staff to the fire department so on‑duty personnel will perform routine checks and opening/closing procedures rather than volunteers. The change is intended as a trial; staff did not describe any formal vote to finalize the policy.

Several members favored pursuing an automated or electronic level‑control system to remove some reliance on human intervention. One participant estimated total project costs could be “a couple hundred thousand” dollars but did not provide a formal cost estimate. Members discussed pursuing federal and state funding, including community block grants and possible earmarks; staff noted prior successful earmarks for other local projects but did not commit to a specific funding source.

To provide an immediate, low‑cost data baseline, the committee agreed on a quick field method: a member will mark a rock at the pond and measure the vertical distance to the current waterline, then measure the same delta at the gate’s orange spray‑paint mark within minutes and photograph the results. The measurements and photographs will be supplied to staff and an engineer for an elevation survey and formal recommendation.

Committee members also mentioned community proposals that could tie to dam work, including a suggestion to pursue acquisition of an underused former IGA property (mentioned purchase price of about $150,000) to expand park space and combine grant requests for park improvements and dam repairs. That idea was raised for future exploration, not decided.

Next steps recorded by the committee: collect coordinated field measurements, share data with staff, invite state dam‑safety staff to the Dec. 2 meeting, follow up with DOT contacts, and investigate potential grant funding sources. No final engineering contract or funding award was approved during the meeting.

The body of evidence for this article is taken from committee discussion and photos described during the meeting.