HARDWICK – One of the less visible parts of running a town like Hardwick is how many different regional systems overlap here. On paper, Vermont looks neatly divided into counties and regions. In practice, especially in this corner of the state, those lines rarely line up in ways that make the work simple.
Hardwick works primarily within one regional planning framework, while much of the Lamoille River watershed is organized within another. That means floodplain work, culvert upgrades, erosion projects, and water quality efforts often require coordination across two regional systems at once.
Conservation districts add another layer. These districts generally follow county lines, not watersheds. That is not theoretical here. Greensboro, Hardwick and Wolcott sit in three separate counties, which means three separate conservation districts, all connected by the Lamoille River. When working on erosion control, agricultural runoff or riverbank stabilization, neighboring communities in the same watershed may be operating under different technical providers and funding structures simply because of county boundaries.
Transportation adds more complexity. State-maintained roads in and around Hardwick fall under three different Vermont Agency of Transportation districts, along with the separate Rail Trail division. A bridge on one route may be managed by a different office than a culvert a few miles away. During storms, those distinctions matter.
Hardwick is the only town in this immediate area with a town manager. That administrative capacity means we often function as a hub for coordination, bringing together engineers, planners, state agencies and neighboring communities. That role is not formally assigned; it has simply evolved because of geography and capacity.
None of these systems are wrong. Planning regions organize growth. Conservation districts support land stewardship. Transportation districts manage road networks. Each was created for a purpose.
The difficulty is that rivers do not recognize any of those lines.
Water flows downhill, and sediment moves where it can. Flooding upstream affects conditions downstream. When a culvert fails in one town, it can alter risk in another. The landscape operates at the scale of a watershed, even when our institutions do not.
Over the past several years, as flood recovery and resilience planning have become more complex, this misalignment has become more visible. A single project may involve multiple planning regions, different conservation districts, more than one transportation office and several state agencies.
From the outside, it can look like one culvert or one stabilization effort. In practice it requires the careful stitching together of systems that were never designed to overlap so closely.
There are advantages to this position. Hardwick is connected to a wide network of partners and technical expertise. We are often well positioned to compete for funding because of those relationships.
But there is also a larger lesson.
If we are serious about reducing flood risk, protecting infrastructure and making smarter long-term investments, we must think at a different scale. That means looking beyond county lines, beyond planning regions and beyond transportation districts. It means strengthening coordination at the watershed level, where cause and effect are directly connected.
The lines on our maps were designed by humans. The river was not consulted.
Hardwick sits at the crossroads of many administrative boundaries. That makes the work more complicated. It also makes the value of watershed-level thinking clearer.
If we want solutions that last, our planning needs to follow the landscape as much as it follows jurisdictional lines.
Kristen Leahy is the Town of Hardwick zoning and floodplain administrator.
