![]() |
Year 2001 Session of the Indiana General Assembly WHAT FURTHER LEGISLATION DO WE NEED TO PROTECT INDIANA'S PIONEER CEMETERIES? |
Ten cemetery protection bills were proposed to the 1999 General Assembly. Only one survived (HB 1522) and went into effect on July 1, 1999 as Public Law 100.
One cemetery protection bill was proposed in the 2000 Session (HB 1184) and it goes into effect on July 1, 2000 as Public Law 46.
There have been some excellent ideas suggested by the Legislators, a number of which failed for one reason or another. Here is an opportunity for us to contribute our thoughts on what we would like to see the Legislature address in its Year 2001 General Assembly Session.
If you have something to add to the list below, please write to Scott Satterthwaite at sjsattert@earthlink.net.
|
|
|
|
| Clarify whether restoration of a cemetery is considering "disturbing" a stone or grave site | Perhaps the Township Trustees could be authorized to grant permission to "disturb" a stone, etc. for the purpose of restoration or repair. Under IC 23-14-68, the Trustees are supposed to be knowledgeable about every cemetery in their Township. They and/or the County Cemetery Commission would seem the logical entity through which to coordinate the granting of such permission. | Many of us are concerned that probing for buried stones for the purpose of repairing them or digging a hole to reset a stone may be construed as "disturbing" a stone or grave. Can Public Law 100 be amended to encourage restoration and repair activities? |
| Multiple counts of cemetery mischief should be permitted under Public Law 100 | Public Law 100 should be amended to permit County Prosecutors to levy
multiple charges or counts of cemetery mischief for multiple acts of destruction,
disturbance or defacement.
If a vandal damages 10, 20, 30 or more stones, the current language does not seem to permit a prosecutor to place multiple charges for multiple infractions. Should damaging 1 stone carry the same penalty as a cemetery desecration rampage or bulldozing 3 dozen graves? |
In July 1999, two weeks after the enactment of Public Law 100, a drunken
adult vandal toppled 98 stones at Founders Cemetery in Wanamaker,
Indiana.
In April 2000, three teenage vandals broke and damaged 145 stones at Grandview Cemetery in Spencer County, Indiana. Should such damage carry the same punishment as disturbing a single grave? |
| Add the license suspension penalty to conviction for cemetery mischief | Public Law 100 should be amended to carry a mandatory one-year suspension of a person's driver's license for conviction of any count of cemetery mischief -- with or without the presence of graffiti. | Sen. Robert Meeks advised that the provision to suspend a person's driver's license for graffiti in cemetery mischief was repetitious. We are advised by Steven Stewart, Clark County Prosecutor, that Public Law 100 does not levy that penalty in any cemetery mischief conviction. This could be a very powerful deterrent to young people contemplating acts of cemetery destruction. |
| Remove exemption from IC 23-14-68 which prevents Township Trustees from maintaining certain abandoned and neglected cemeteries | Amend IC
23-14-68 to remove the offending sentence. Thousands of pioneer
cemeteries in Indiana are at risk because the Trustees are not permitted
by the statute to care for them.
U.S. District Court Judge Hugh Dillin's ancestors were buried in Wilhoit Cemetery in Dubois Co. For years, the Trustee cared for this site. One year after the law was changed, the property owners were permitted to excavate those remains with a backhoe. |
Indiana Code Title 23, Article 14, Chapter 68 (Care of Cemeteries by Townships), as amended through the 1997 Regular Session, states that a Township Trustee is not responsible for maintaining an abandoned and neglected cemetery if it is "located on land on which property taxes are assessed and paid under IC 6-1.1-4." |
| Ingress and egress (access to our ancestors' grave sites) | Legislation which assures descendants the right to reasonable access to ancestors' burial places while still protecting the property rights of the landowner and protecting the landowner from allegations of negligence, etc. if a visitor should be injured; would also need to require that visitors be responsible for any damage they might cause to the property. | Apparently there is nothing in Indiana law assuring citizens of the right to reasonable access to our ancestors' graves -- especially the ones on private property or surrounded by private property. |
| Proper maintenance of pioneer cemeteries on public property | Legislation to compel Township
Trustees to (1) identify and (2) maintain abandoned and neglected cemeteries
in their Townships, pursuant to IC
23-14-68. Perhaps the penalty for failure to do so should be
stiffened.
Would also need provision to compel property owners to allow the Trustees to enter on their land to perform such maintenance (e.g., easement for ingress and egress). If the property owner can refuse access, how can the Trustee maintain it? |
Some Trustees have reported that they are not allowed access
to cemeteries for which they are responsible because the owners of the
surrounding property will not permit entry.
In many states, a cemetery cannot be "land-locked". This is apparently not true in Indiana. If the property owner does not wish to allow the Trustee to maintain the site, then the property owner should be required to do so and meet a certain standard of care. |
| Recording of location of all cemeteries | Require that all cemetery locations be recorded in the Cemetery book
in the County Recorders office.
As IC 23-14-68-2 requires the Township Trustees to "locate and maintain all the cemeteries described in section 1(a) of this chapter that are within the township", the logical entity to record the locations of all cemeteries should fall to the Trustees. By first identifying "all the cemeteries" in his/her Township, the Trustee will be in a better position to ascertain which sites are indeed his/her responsibility. |
Reporting should include the identity of the current owner of cemetery
property, the precise location of the site and a description of site.
Oftentimes, a title search and/or survey or, at a minimum, inquiry of the Assessor is required to determine if cemetery is being taxed. |
| County Cemetery Commissions | Require the County Commissioners to appoint County Cemetery Commissions and require the County Councils to adequately fund those Commissions, pursuant to existing statutes. At present, those Commissions are optional and funding for same rests entirely with the County Councils, which are under no obligation to provide even minimal funding. | See HB 1422, proposed in 1999 session, which proposed to remove the
care of all abandoned and neglected cemeteries from the Trustees and depositing
that responsibility with the County Cemetery Commissions.
This Bill died when the Township Trustees objected to removal of care of abandoned and neglected cemeteries from their offices. There is an important distinction between cemetery maintenance and cemetery restoration. Trustees are responsible for maintenance; the County Cemetery Commissions' goal is cemetery restoration. The two functions are not the same. |
| Pioneer Cemeteries Maintenance and Restoration Fund | Create a pioneer cemeteries maintenance and restoration fund; permit county cemetery association, township trustees and county cemetery commissions to apply for grants from this fund. | Mechanism for receiving donations and issuing grants for the maintenance and restoration of abandoned and neglected pioneer cemeteries in the State. |
| Require reinterment of dislocated graves | Mandate that all legally disinterred human remains be reinterred with a reasonable period of time in a suitable location with perpetual care provisions. | Property owners must be required to reinter disturbed human remains and eliminating the opportunity to "donate" them to universities for archeological research, thus avoiding the expense of reinterment. |
| Eliminate the authority of the Department of Health to issue disinterment permits without adequate public notice and require the express permission of more than one descendant | Property owners should be required to publish a prominent newspaper advertisement regarding a proposed move (at least 60 days notice with advice of recourse), descendants and interested parties should have a right to express their opinions before a judge and the permission of more than one verified lineal descendant of a specified degree of consanguity should be required. | Presently, the Department of Health can issue a permit for the disinterment of human remains based on the signature of one descendant, regardless of the descendant's mental capacity or degree of consanguity. |
| Standard of care for reinterment | Require that all expenses associated with the disinterment,
removal, acquisition of the new burial site, and reinterment be paid by
the person effecting the disinterment, removal, acquisition, and reinterment.
Require the person effecting the disinterment, removal, and reinterment to ensure that the site for reinterment is suitable and reasonably accessible to relatives of the decedent. Require that disinterment, removal, and reinterment be performed under the supervision and direction of the county executive or the county executive's designee. Require that due care be taken to furnish suitable coffins or boxes for reinterring human remains and to remove, protect, and reinstall all gravestones or other markers. (No mass reburials.) |
|
Return
to the INPCRP
main page