The one thing that continually gets to me is that this ISN'T "brain surgery." It's Ethics 101 and Morality 102. It's a cemetery. People's loved ones are buried there. It was there first. Leave it alone. Simple....common sense. Give it to a legislator and it comes out sounding like Martian gibberish. Law enforcement has enough on it's hands with crimes against the living. Crimes against the defenseless dead just aren't priorities, even if there are three-fold the victims because of the living descendants of those dead. It's America - you gotta love it! Anywhere else we wouldn't be able to have these gripe sessions. Sue Silver ----- Original Message ----- From: <Jb502000@aol.com> To: <INPCRP-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [INPCRP] Cemetery Laws & Such > In a message dated 1/3/02 11:31:44 AM US Eastern Standard Time, > wspurlock@savinggraves.com writes: > > > > The problem is, the time was right years ago. > > > > > > Bill, > > I am with you 100%. I am going over the cemetery laws in All the states. I > > believe it will take 2 months, but it is worth it. I found the law in > > Missouri that gives you the right to visit an Abandoned family or private > > burying ground if it is Land Locked, accompanied by the Sheriff or Chief > > law enforcement official if you can't get permission. There are a lot of > > other "Good Laws" out there Bill. I think your idea is wonderful and it can > > work when our country assumes some semblance of normality. Good Luck. > > > Jack E. Briles, Sr. > jb502000@aol.com > Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator > PO Box 444 > New Albany, In. 47151-0444 > (812) 282-6585 > > > > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > Quote from William Gladstone (1809-1897), three-time Prime Minister of England > and Victorian contemporary of Benjamin Disraeli: > "Show me the manner in which a nation or community > cares for its dead and I will measure with mathematical > exactness the tender mercies of its people, their > respect for the laws of the land, and their loyalty > to high ideals." > >

I think you will find that there have always been heartless people who were willing to destroy a cemetery to make room for something else, or to keep from having to maintain it. The only difference is that there wasn't the opportunity for the media to expose them back in those days. And there probably weren't any laws, either. I guess we should be thankful that we have 'some' protection on the books, even if it has several loopholes. Is there anyone on here that is from or working on Montgomery County? I have a family cemetery that no longer exists where I believe several of my ancestors are buried, including a Revolutionary War veteran. I'd appreciate a private e-mail if anyone is working on Montgomery Co. And unless the law specifically states WHO is responsible for the designation on the deeds, no one will take responsibility. My guess is it falls on the attorney/abstractor who prepares it... Thanks, everyone....and keep up the good work. Do we have any ideas on proposed legislation for this year? The short session begins next week. -Kyle

Most definitely, Sue! Here in Washington, most of the cemeteries seemed to have caretakers up until then...people from the neighborhood or interested community members. We also saw a lot of organizations that took care of cemeteries. But with the depression, much of that stopped. Many of our cemeteries here started disappearing with the forests growing back at around the time of the depression and just after. Now, we are hard put to find anyone willing to take over the care of a cemetery, and those that do are usurped by laws, nasty neighbors, government rules, and just about every other inconvenience. -------------- Andrea D. MacDonald "Andi" andimac@oz.net Washington State Cemetery Association http://www.rootsweb.com/~wapsgs/ "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Silver" <ssilver1951@jps.net> To: <INPCRP-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 9:44 PM Subject: Re: [INPCRP] Cemetery Laws & Such > You are so right in many respects. > > I was speaking of the time pre-20th Century. I know we had people using > cemetery stones for foundations here also, but that was in the 1920's and > 1930's. I've found so many things began happening that are consistent with > those time periods. I'm wondering if the economic depression forced people > to do things ("make do") that they ordinarily would not have done. There > has to be something that went on - we see it in the supervision of the > cemeteries also. Before 1920, there was always a community member who > seemed to be "in charge". After 1920 and after, they all sort of > disappeared. > > Anyone notice this also? > > Sue > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christine West" <cherokee@shelbynet.net> > To: <INPCRP-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 9:12 PM > Subject: [INPCRP] Cemetery Laws & Such > > > > Sue wrote: > > > You know, in the past, people would never have considered building their > > house or a barn on a cemetery. It just wasn't done. They had respect. > > What happened? > > > > > > > > > Not wanting to detract from Sue's message about comparing laws of other > > states, but this statement has always bothered me. We hear it a lot, but > it > > isn't really very true. Here in Bartholomew County, we have "rumors" that > > were written down by historians as early as 1930 that tell of barns in the > > county whose foundations were constructed of tombstones from a cemetery, > now > > not even known exactly where it even was. A drywell "near Edinburgh" was > > lined with every stone from an old cemetery. A grave was discovered at > the > > intersection of 2 roads near where a new Menards will be located soon, and > > all that was known about it at the time it was written down was that a > > witness who was a boy at the time it was unearthed and an 80 year old man > > when it was written down, still recalled how no one remembered or could > even > > guess who it was or would have been, but a single button of a > revolutionary > > war uniform was found with it. The Lewelling family cemetery was > purposely > > plowed under by a farmer in about 1940 who did not even own the 1/4 acre > it > > sat on. We know he did it on purpose because he actually dug a grave and > > laid the 4 remaining headstones in it, so they wouldn't keep popping up as > > he farmed it. He was the son of a state legislator at the time! > > > > While we are amazed at what we see happen in our times, I am thankful we > > have the hope of seeing in our lifetime the correction or at least the > > elimination of further such atrocities. I can't imagine how anyone, > > yesterday, today or 60 years ago could knowingly remove headstones from > > graves, but we know it happens. I am very glad we have this forum that > > allows us to voice our stories and learn from one another about this > subject > > we have all chosen to become a part of. I would like to thank everyone > who > > has replied to my recent question about the excepted cemetery status. I > > believe Jack has rightly pinpointed that we need to document these > apparent > > loop-holes in our new codes and do what we can to see them corrected. > > > > I was pleased to see that one change that was made in 2001 to the laws > > written in 2000 was that it defined a little more for us what a "recorded > > cemetery" was. I agree again with Jack about the tax-break for cemetery > > owners. I read that one and could not even come up with a comparable > > situation that I knew of. Not just does it not clearly define what the > > landowners responsibilities are after declaring such a break, but most > > cemeteries not owned by a church or municipality are going to be less than > > one acre. Anyone who has ever had property surveyed, you know the possible > > high cost of having a surveyor come out and perform such a service, > > especially to the letter that is described in the new code, telling him > > exactly how much documentation is required. It doesn't seem worth it > > money-wise for them to even try to declare it for tax purposes. > > > > The other "loop-hole" that needs addressed is WHICH OFFICE HOLDER is > > responsible for catching these cemeteries. In general conversation, I > have > > them all agreeing with me, but ask ANY of them and the AUDITOR, SURVEYOR, > > COMMISSIONER and RECORDER all shake their heads and say it is not their > > responsibility. The new law says the auditor shall require the deed to be > > written a certain way, but if they don't know there is a cemetery there, > how > > will they know to require a special statement on the deed? > > > > Anyway, again, thank you for all of the input. > > > > Cris West > > Columbus, IN > > > > > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > > Blessed are the Elderly, for they remember what we will never know. > > > > > > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > Please do not send queries through this list. > > >

In a message dated 1/2/02 2:37:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time, rvkeller@iupui.edu writes: > Well if you mean ANY property, no such thing. A family recently gave the > city of Greenfield a few acres. The city would love to make it into a > park since there is not much park land on the west area of the city. The > problem is that it's land locked. So I would assume that over the years > the property around this area was legally sold to others even though it > would land lock. > > On Tue, 1 Jan 2002, Sue Silver wrote: > > > California has a prohibition against landlocking property. In fact, it > just > > cannot happen because the law doesn't allow it. > > > > Any such thing like this in Indiana? > > > > Sue Silver > > CA > > ----- Original Message ----- > Ryan, If the city of Greenfield doesn't use the rights of Eminent domain to obtain a right of way it's only because they don't want a park at this time or don't have the funds available. they do have the power under the law as follows: Information Maintained by the office of Code Revision Indiana Legislature Service Agency Title 32 IC 32-11 Article 11. Eminent Domain Covered by IC 32-11-1 Thru IC 32-11-12 IC 32-11-2.1 Contains a UNIFORM LAND or EASEMENT ACQUISITION OFFER FORM That the Government agency has to use to start proceedings. The Law is Long, but it is very specific how the city could obtain a right of way to the Acreage to make a Park, if they wanted one. The Officials of the Government Entity wanting a right of way may Legally go on to the Property, more than once if necessary to be sure they want an access rd. and they cannot be charged with Trespassing. I have never agreed with the Law but I guess at times it is necessary. According to the Law they must give the location that they need on the property they wish to cross, the width and length. The matter probably would end up in court, so to be sure of getting what they want, they would pick the shortest route, and the narrowest road feasible. But they must want to let the acreage sit to see if they need it later. They can get access anytime. The above does not cover private property around a cemetery. Although it might be possible for a Trustee to save a Historic Cemetery. This would be for the good of the Public. Jack E. Briles, Sr. jb502000@aol.com Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator PO Box 444 New Albany, In. 47151-0444 (812) 282-6585

To: Jeannie-Regan Dinius Jeannie, I hate to take up your time, but since you have been designated Liaison or go between with the Public and the DNR, (you may have volunteered) I feel this is a worthwhile question to ask. Are there any figures in as of the first of the year, the first 6 months, on how many Land Owners have Registered or taken advantage of the New Law allowing for the Surveying and Fencing of their Burial Ground, Graveyard or Cemetery on their property, thereby receiving their $1.oo tax assessment. I have traveled Southern Indiana to various cemeteries. No Property owner I have talked to has decided to participate. In fact most didn't know about the Law, and stated they weren't interested. I am very curious about how well the Law has been received. No hurry on the answer. Incidentally I hear from an associate of yours that you are doing a fine job, keep up the good work, and Thanks, Sincerely, Jack E. Briles Sr, jb502000@aol.com Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator PO Box 444 New Albany, In. 47151-0444 (812) 282-6585

In a message dated 1/2/02 11:11:50 PM US Eastern Standard Time, cherokee@shelbynet.net writes: > Anyway, again, thank you for all of the input. > > Cris West > Columbus, IN > > Cris, I could never said what you did any better if I worked on it > for a week. > I am also glad that you are not willing to set back and let one or two > people bring up all of the faults we can encounter in our Restoration work. > I know almost everyone on the list agrees with you, they are just hesitant > to get involved when there is nothing wrong with getting involved. If > anyone has something to bring up for discussion they can E-mail me > personally and I will Start a discussion to try and find a suitable > solution. I WILL NOT IDENTIFY YOU. if you don't want your name used. Cris > as to the Law you mentioned about Surveying and Fencing, by 1 AM I will > have an E-mail to Jeannie to ask for a number on how many have taken > advantage of the Law. Since there are no real benefits to the Law, I doubt > that the Number is very impressive. We'll try to find out. Jack E. Briles, Sr. jb502000@aol.com Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator PO Box 444 New Albany, In. 47151-0444 (812) 282-6585

Sue wrote: > You know, in the past, people would never have considered building their house or a barn on a cemetery. It just wasn't done. They had respect. What happened? > Not wanting to detract from Sue's message about comparing laws of other states, but this statement has always bothered me. We hear it a lot, but it isn't really very true. Here in Bartholomew County, we have "rumors" that were written down by historians as early as 1930 that tell of barns in the county whose foundations were constructed of tombstones from a cemetery, now not even known exactly where it even was. A drywell "near Edinburgh" was lined with every stone from an old cemetery. A grave was discovered at the intersection of 2 roads near where a new Menards will be located soon, and all that was known about it at the time it was written down was that a witness who was a boy at the time it was unearthed and an 80 year old man when it was written down, still recalled how no one remembered or could even guess who it was or would have been, but a single button of a revolutionary war uniform was found with it. The Lewelling family cemetery was purposely plowed under by a farmer in about 1940 who did not even own the 1/4 acre it sat on. We know he did it on purpose because he actually dug a grave and laid the 4 remaining headstones in it, so they wouldn't keep popping up as he farmed it. He was the son of a state legislator at the time! While we are amazed at what we see happen in our times, I am thankful we have the hope of seeing in our lifetime the correction or at least the elimination of further such atrocities. I can't imagine how anyone, yesterday, today or 60 years ago could knowingly remove headstones from graves, but we know it happens. I am very glad we have this forum that allows us to voice our stories and learn from one another about this subject we have all chosen to become a part of. I would like to thank everyone who has replied to my recent question about the excepted cemetery status. I believe Jack has rightly pinpointed that we need to document these apparent loop-holes in our new codes and do what we can to see them corrected. I was pleased to see that one change that was made in 2001 to the laws written in 2000 was that it defined a little more for us what a "recorded cemetery" was. I agree again with Jack about the tax-break for cemetery owners. I read that one and could not even come up with a comparable situation that I knew of. Not just does it not clearly define what the landowners responsibilities are after declaring such a break, but most cemeteries not owned by a church or municipality are going to be less than one acre. Anyone who has ever had property surveyed, you know the possible high cost of having a surveyor come out and perform such a service, especially to the letter that is described in the new code, telling him exactly how much documentation is required. It doesn't seem worth it money-wise for them to even try to declare it for tax purposes. The other "loop-hole" that needs addressed is WHICH OFFICE HOLDER is responsible for catching these cemeteries. In general conversation, I have them all agreeing with me, but ask ANY of them and the AUDITOR, SURVEYOR, COMMISSIONER and RECORDER all shake their heads and say it is not their responsibility. The new law says the auditor shall require the deed to be written a certain way, but if they don't know there is a cemetery there, how will they know to require a special statement on the deed? Anyway, again, thank you for all of the input. Cris West Columbus, IN

You are so right in many respects. I was speaking of the time pre-20th Century. I know we had people using cemetery stones for foundations here also, but that was in the 1920's and 1930's. I've found so many things began happening that are consistent with those time periods. I'm wondering if the economic depression forced people to do things ("make do") that they ordinarily would not have done. There has to be something that went on - we see it in the supervision of the cemeteries also. Before 1920, there was always a community member who seemed to be "in charge". After 1920 and after, they all sort of disappeared. Anyone notice this also? Sue ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christine West" <cherokee@shelbynet.net> To: <INPCRP-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 9:12 PM Subject: [INPCRP] Cemetery Laws & Such > Sue wrote: > > You know, in the past, people would never have considered building their > house or a barn on a cemetery. It just wasn't done. They had respect. > What happened? > > > > > Not wanting to detract from Sue's message about comparing laws of other > states, but this statement has always bothered me. We hear it a lot, but it > isn't really very true. Here in Bartholomew County, we have "rumors" that > were written down by historians as early as 1930 that tell of barns in the > county whose foundations were constructed of tombstones from a cemetery, now > not even known exactly where it even was. A drywell "near Edinburgh" was > lined with every stone from an old cemetery. A grave was discovered at the > intersection of 2 roads near where a new Menards will be located soon, and > all that was known about it at the time it was written down was that a > witness who was a boy at the time it was unearthed and an 80 year old man > when it was written down, still recalled how no one remembered or could even > guess who it was or would have been, but a single button of a revolutionary > war uniform was found with it. The Lewelling family cemetery was purposely > plowed under by a farmer in about 1940 who did not even own the 1/4 acre it > sat on. We know he did it on purpose because he actually dug a grave and > laid the 4 remaining headstones in it, so they wouldn't keep popping up as > he farmed it. He was the son of a state legislator at the time! > > While we are amazed at what we see happen in our times, I am thankful we > have the hope of seeing in our lifetime the correction or at least the > elimination of further such atrocities. I can't imagine how anyone, > yesterday, today or 60 years ago could knowingly remove headstones from > graves, but we know it happens. I am very glad we have this forum that > allows us to voice our stories and learn from one another about this subject > we have all chosen to become a part of. I would like to thank everyone who > has replied to my recent question about the excepted cemetery status. I > believe Jack has rightly pinpointed that we need to document these apparent > loop-holes in our new codes and do what we can to see them corrected. > > I was pleased to see that one change that was made in 2001 to the laws > written in 2000 was that it defined a little more for us what a "recorded > cemetery" was. I agree again with Jack about the tax-break for cemetery > owners. I read that one and could not even come up with a comparable > situation that I knew of. Not just does it not clearly define what the > landowners responsibilities are after declaring such a break, but most > cemeteries not owned by a church or municipality are going to be less than > one acre. Anyone who has ever had property surveyed, you know the possible > high cost of having a surveyor come out and perform such a service, > especially to the letter that is described in the new code, telling him > exactly how much documentation is required. It doesn't seem worth it > money-wise for them to even try to declare it for tax purposes. > > The other "loop-hole" that needs addressed is WHICH OFFICE HOLDER is > responsible for catching these cemeteries. In general conversation, I have > them all agreeing with me, but ask ANY of them and the AUDITOR, SURVEYOR, > COMMISSIONER and RECORDER all shake their heads and say it is not their > responsibility. The new law says the auditor shall require the deed to be > written a certain way, but if they don't know there is a cemetery there, how > will they know to require a special statement on the deed? > > Anyway, again, thank you for all of the input. > > Cris West > Columbus, IN > > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > Blessed are the Elderly, for they remember what we will never know. > >

hey, RV i have discussed this with several concerned people here in Southern Indiana, We think you are 100% right and we agree with you. Good Luck, keep up the good work. Thank You.

In a message dated 1/1/02 6:31:22 PM US Eastern Standard Time, ssilver1951@jps.net writes: > California has a prohibition against landlocking property. In fact, it just > cannot happen because the law doesn't allow it. > > Any such thing like this in Indiana? > > Sue Silver > CA > SORRY about the first E-mail on this Subject, I used my Talk and Type,don't work Sue, and the INPCRP LIST I have spent several hours on the Legal Aspects of Indiana's Cemetery Laws or lack of them, especially since December 27 when I believe this Discussion started. I know I had to do some reading myself, and I usually pride myself in pretty well knowing the basics of the Laws off the top of my head. There is no doubt our Group knows how to Find, clean, Repair and restore our Neglected cemeteries. We all are becoming very good at this. Also preparing lists of all of our cemeteries to turn over to the state for recording in the Data Base. But after much soul searching I don't believe enough List members are aware of what is Legal and what's not. I believe the Legislature has handed down some Laws that are not very clearly defined. For instance, the one passed last year allowing a Property owner to Survey and fence off one acre of ground designated as a cemetery and pay an assessment of $1.oo in taxes on that acre. There is only one flaw in that Law if I am reading it right. It does not have a provision for the Public to Access the cemetery, yet the Public is not receiving the use of the cemetery although they are being denied the full Taxable amount that the acre would normally bring in no matter how small. I also see that after this Tax Windfall (small) they have to Fence it and keep the fence up, but I apparently missed the part that says they have to clean it, keep it cleaned and repair broken stones, also leveling and grading that would be required if the Township Trustee were in possession of the cemetery. Matter of fact, these Property owners bought their Parcel of Land, and beyond all doubt knew the cemetery was there. Knowing there are Descendants of the people buried there, the Land owner is probably sufficiently educated enough to know these Descendants will want to visit. Therefore if they take advantage of the States Tax offer they should make the cemetery available to visitors during reasonable hours. Visitors should never climb over a Fence, nor should they have to. Remember, all Property owners will not prohibit you from visiting. Many are very cooperative and understanding. I will be the first to admit that we are very slowly getting Laws passed that are helping a Little bit. But what we need to do now is bring this inaccessibility problem to most graveyards more out into the open. We have to make more people aware of this Very, Very large gap in the Laws. Also, on the front of Property Deeds that have the cemetery wording on them should be added the words "Reasonable Access (shall) not be denied" or something to that effect. I know the Farm Lobby will Fight this, but we have to try. I carry my insurance with Farm Bureau, and in order to do this you must be a member. That gives me the right to voice my opinion. I know I am only one person, but one little boy with his Finger in a Dike stopped a catastrophe. This is basically what we are facing now. The cemeteries are fast slipping through a few holes in the Law with no one willing to help stem the flow. Go to Access Indiana and see what kind of Laws the DNR are getting on some things they consider extremely important. Don't get me wrong, the DNR does not write the laws, but they could help the Legislative committee by pointing out some inadequacies. Also allowing the complainant to meet with the Officer at trouble sites would present both sides. Again this is only my opinion, but access to the Pioneer cemeteries we are all trying to save is the one real problem, WE CANT GET IN. I also believe many Persons on the List, as well as around the state thought they had the right to Access a cemetery because they had relatives buried there. That is only true if you find a Very caring and God fearing Farmer, or Property owner that respects the Living and the Dead. I have been asked many times "how can I visit my families cemetery" I have to tell them, "be very nice to the owner and pray they care" Even with a right of way on the cemetery Deed, the owners have said NO. You then have two choices, you can hire a Lawyer, or just stand in the road and raise H--- THE following is a Quote of a Missouri Statute MRS, Chapter 214, Cemeteries, Sec. 214.132, August 28 2001 VISITING ABANDONED FAMILY OR PRIVATE BURYING GROUNDS surrounded by private property, right of access, when, enforcement by sheriff--courts power to disinteer 214.132. 1. Any person who wishes to visit an abandoned family cemetery or private burying ground which is completely surrounded by privately owned land, for which no public ingress nor egress is available, (shall) have the right to reasonable ingress and egress for the purpose of visiting such cemetery. This right of access to such cemeteries extends only to visitation during reasonable hours and only for purposes usually associated with cemetery visits. 2. The sheriff or chief law enforcement officer of the county in which the abandoned family cemetery or burying ground is located (shall) enforce the provisions of subsection 1 of this section 3. Nothing in section 214.131 and this section (shall) be construed to limit or modify the power or authority of a court in any action of law or equity to order the disinterment and removal of the remains from a cemetery and internment in a suitable location. 1987 H.B. 60 1997 S.B. 58 This means you can VISIT or have your Ancestor removed from one of these cemeteries to another Site. Jack E. Briles, Sr. jb502000@aol.com Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator PO Box 444 New Albany, In. 47151-0444 (812) 282-6585

Well if you mean ANY property, no such thing. A family recently gave the city of Greenfield a few acres. The city would love to make it into a park since there is not much park land on the west area of the city. The problem is that it's land locked. So I would assume that over the years the property around this area was legally sold to others even though it would land lock. On Tue, 1 Jan 2002, Sue Silver wrote: > California has a prohibition against landlocking property. In fact, it just > cannot happen because the law doesn't allow it. > > Any such thing like this in Indiana? > > Sue Silver > CA > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <rvkeller@iupui.edu> > To: <INPCRP-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 11:18 AM > Subject: Re: [INPCRP] Wheres the Cemetery? > > > > > > > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Donna Tauber wrote: > > > > > Thank you for the compliment on my position, I take my job seriously, > and I also > > > consider myself to be a historic preservationist. I agree that we need > more > > > specific legislation on cemetery laws, as a fairly new member to the > Trustee > > > World (3 years) many of these codes are vague or nonexistent in certain > areas, or > > > better yet, contradict each other. Do we have any lobbyists amongst us > that are > > > up to this challenge of proposing new legislation on cemetery laws? > > > > > > I think the problem people will run into with 'land locked' cemeteries is > > that of privacy. I searched the Indiana Code and there are cases for > > Eminent Domain, but it doesn't apply to cemeteries. > > > > > > > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > > Cemetery: (n) A marble orchard not to be taken for granite. > > > > > > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > THIS IS A CEMETERY ----- > "Lives are commemorated - deaths are recorded - families > are reunited - memories are made tangible - and love is > undisguised. This is a cemetery. > "Communities accord respect, families bestow reverence, > historians seek information and our heritage is thereby enriched. > "Testimonies of devotion, pride and remembrance are carved > in stone to pay warm tribute to accomplishments and to the life - > not the death - of a loved one. The cemetery is homeland for family > memorials that are a sustaining source of comfort to the living. > "A cemetery is a history of people - a perpetual record of > yesterday and sanctuary of peace and quiet today. A cemetery > exists because every life is worth loving and remembering - always." > --Author unknown -- Seen at a monument dealer in West Union, IA > >

Good morning, I'm probably going to catch H... for this, but has anyone considered reviewing other state's cemetery laws to see how Indiana's compare, and if the other state's are better, why not ask the legislature to consider using laws that already work elsewhere. One state, Washington, has an incredible preservation statute that allows the cemeteries to be adopted by non-profit cemetery corporation only for preservation and restoration purposes. For historic cemeteries no long being used for active interments and with no one else want the responsibility, it's perfect. Why is that with 50 states in this great union, they're all struggling to legislate statutes on the same subject and they're all so vastly different? It's a little like reinventing the wheel! You know, in the past, people would never have considered building their house or a barn on a cemetery. It just wasn't done. They had respect. What happened? Sue Silver CA

In a message dated 1/1/02 6:31:22 PM US Eastern Standard Time, ssilver1951@jps.net writes: > California has a prohibition against landlocking property. In fact, it just > cannot happen because the law doesn't allow it. > > Any such thing like this in Indiana? > > Sue Silver > CA > > Sue, and the INPCRP List The Following is a Dream of mine > I have spent several hours on the Legal aspects of Indiana's cemetery Laws > or Lack of them, especially since December 27 when I believe this > discussion started. I know I had to do some reading myself and I usually > pride myself in pretty well knowing the basics of the laws off the top of > my head. There is no doubt that our group knows how to Find, Clean, Repair > and Restore our Neglected cemeteries. We all are becoming very good at > this. Also preparing lists of all cemeteries to turn over to the state for > recording in the Data Base. But after much soul searching I don't believe > enough List members are aware of what might be legal and what might not. I > believe the Legislature has handed down some cemetery laws that are not > very clearly defined. > For instance, the one passed last year allowing a property owner to > survey and fence off one acre of ground designated as a cemetery and only > pay $1.oo in taxes on that acre. There is one little flaw in that law if I > am reading it right. It does not have a provision for the public to access > the cemetery, yet the Public is not receiving the use of the cemetery > although they are being denied the full taxable amount that the acre would > normally bring in no matter how small. I also see that after this tax > windfall (small) they have to fence it and keep the fence up, but I > apparently missed the part that says they have to clean it and keep it > cleaned and repair the broken stones, also leveling and grading that would > be required if the Township Trustees were in possession of the Cemetery. > Matter of fact these Property owners bought their Parcel and beyond all > doubt knew the cemetery was there. Knowing there are Ancestors of the > People buried there, the Land owner probably is sufficiently educated > enough to know these Ancestors will want to visit. Therefore if they take advantage of the States Tax offer they should make the > cemetery available to visitors during reasonable hours. Visitors should > I will be the first to > Little. But > really what we need to do now is to bring this inaccessibility to these > Graveyards more out into the open. We have to make more people aware of > Also on the Front of property Deeds > the words "Reasonable access > (Shall) not be denied" or something to that effect. I know the Farm Lobby > will fight this, but we have to try. I carry my insurance with Farm Bureau, > and in order to do so you must be a Member. That gives me the right to > voice my opinion. I know I am only one person, but one little boy with his > finger in a dike stopped a Catastrophe. This is basically what we are > facing now, the cemeteries are fast slipping thru a few holes in the law > with no one willing to help stem the flow. Go to access Indiana and see > what kind of Laws the DNR are getting on some things they consider > extremely important. Don't get me wrong, the DNR does not write the Laws, > but they could help the committee by pointing out some inadequacies. Again this only my opinion, but access to the Pioneer cemeteries we all > to save is the one real problem we are facing. WE CANT GET IN. > I believe to many thought they had the right to Access a cemetery because > they had relatives buried there. That is true if you find a Very caring and > God Fearing Farmer, or Property owner that respects the Living and the > dead. I have been asked many times "how can I visit my families cemetery" I > have to tell them, be very nice to the owner and pray that they care. Even > with a right of way on the cemetery Deed, the owners have said no. Do you > want to hire a lawyer and go to court or just stand on the road and raise > H--- Jack E. Briles, Sr. jb502000@aol.com Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator PO Box 444 New Albany, In. 47151-0444 (812) 282-6585

Sue, If there is they have never printed it in the IC Coda Jack E. Briles, Sr. jb502000@aol.com Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator PO Box 444 New Albany, In. 47151-0444 (812) 282-6585

California has a prohibition against landlocking property. In fact, it just cannot happen because the law doesn't allow it. Any such thing like this in Indiana? Sue Silver CA ----- Original Message ----- From: <rvkeller@iupui.edu> To: <INPCRP-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [INPCRP] Wheres the Cemetery? > > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Donna Tauber wrote: > > > Thank you for the compliment on my position, I take my job seriously, and I also > > consider myself to be a historic preservationist. I agree that we need more > > specific legislation on cemetery laws, as a fairly new member to the Trustee > > World (3 years) many of these codes are vague or nonexistent in certain areas, or > > better yet, contradict each other. Do we have any lobbyists amongst us that are > > up to this challenge of proposing new legislation on cemetery laws? > > > I think the problem people will run into with 'land locked' cemeteries is > that of privacy. I searched the Indiana Code and there are cases for > Eminent Domain, but it doesn't apply to cemeteries. > > > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > Cemetery: (n) A marble orchard not to be taken for granite. > >

On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Donna Tauber wrote: > Thank you for the compliment on my position, I take my job seriously, and I also > consider myself to be a historic preservationist. I agree that we need more > specific legislation on cemetery laws, as a fairly new member to the Trustee > World (3 years) many of these codes are vague or nonexistent in certain areas, or > better yet, contradict each other. Do we have any lobbyists amongst us that are > up to this challenge of proposing new legislation on cemetery laws? I think the problem people will run into with 'land locked' cemeteries is that of privacy. I searched the Indiana Code and there are cases for Eminent Domain, but it doesn't apply to cemeteries.

Thank you for the compliment on my position, I take my job seriously, and I also consider myself to be a historic preservationist. I agree that we need more specific legislation on cemetery laws, as a fairly new member to the Trustee World (3 years) many of these codes are vague or nonexistent in certain areas, or better yet, contradict each other. Do we have any lobbyists amongst us that are up to this challenge of proposing new legislation on cemetery laws? Jb502000@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 12/30/01 9:02:48 PM US Eastern Standard Time, > dtauber@kiva.net writes: > > > Sec. 2. If land has not been appropriated or set apart by the owners by > > platting for a public cemetery and it is necessary to purchase real estate > > for > > the cemetery: > > (1) the legislative body of the city or town; > > (2) the executive of the township; > > (3) the trustees or directors of the corporation or association; or > > (4) the other owners; > > have the power of eminent domain to condemn and appropriate the land for > > cemetery > > purposes under proceedings provided by statute. > > As added by P.L.52-1997, SEC.49 > > > > Donna Tauber > > Spiceland Township Trustee of Henry County > > > > > > > > Donna, > > If you check the meaning of the Section you cited I believe you will find > that it applies to the need or use of ground for a cemetery either not > already in existence, or the need to enlarge one already in existence. It is > only my personal interpretation of the law that it does not apply to Excepted > cemeteries not in an active state and More than likely "Land Locked". And yes > cemeteries sitting inside the boundaries of a piece of Land which does not > come in contact with a Public right of way, and do not have a Deeded access > to them does not fall under this Law. Rights of Eminent Domain apply only to > Property that is necessary for the Good of the Public in General. It does not > apply to un used land occupied by a cemetery in the middle of a field with no > apparent benefits to the Public Good. I wish this were not true, it would > make it less cumbersome to attempt to get landowners to consent to allow > Trustees and Groups such as the INPCRP, and local historic organizations the > right to go in and clean them up. I have read and reread the Laws and I can > find no legal way without Legislation of some sort to help us all achieve our > often stated goals. Maybe we should all concentrate on getting some kind of > law passed that would require some realistic Legislation that might require a > little more effort on the part of Legislatures. It would give us something to > work toward for the New Year. The above is only my interpretation of the Laws > as I understand them. I wish we could get the DNR or the Legislature to help > on this subject. Donna, I wish to thank you very much. It makes me feel > much better to Hear from a Trustee who is willing to speak up. This means you > are doing your job. The residents in your Township should be very > appreciative to have someone who really cares. > > Jack E. Briles, Sr. > jb502000@aol.com > Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator > PO Box 444 > New Albany, In. 47151-0444 > (812) 282-6585 > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > This list is for discussion of topics related to the Indiana Pioneer > Cemeteries Restoration Project only.

In a message dated 12/31/01 6:43:33 PM US Eastern Standard Time, ssilver1951@jps.net writes: > It's not perfect, but it gives the State (and through it the > counties) the ability to take legal jurisdiction over these "abandoned" > cemeteries. Especially the one's with the reserved, saved and excepted from > clauses where no one's willing to step up to the plate. > > Sue, there is nothing I know of in the Indiana Code that gives the State, Counties or cities the > Legal right to take possession of These cemeteries > out in the middle of someone's Property. I know we need some kind of Law > that would make these property owners when they take possession of the > Property that has the words "There is a Cemetery or Burial Site on this > Property" legally responsible to keep them clean and fenced, OR turn them > over to the Township Trustee along with the rights of Ingress and Egress > for the Trustees to maintain them. Then there would be no cost to the > property owner. Along with ownership the Trustee would assume the cost of > maintenance. I know from experience, Indiana is still learning how to walk > compared to California. California, due to the great influx of People since > before the Gold Rush, has caused the state to respond in some positive ways > when it comes to "abandoned or Neglected property and large number of > cemeteries. I hope we can catch up. We went for years without any positive > moves on cemetery Laws. Now we are in Danger of asking to much to quick for > our Legislature. I print out the copies of your laws and any others I can > get, and file them for Ideas. Thanks, and keep us up on any laws we discuss. > Jack E. Briles, Sr. jb502000@aol.com Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator PO Box 444 New Albany, In. 47151-0444 (812) 282-6585

Eminent Domain (Noun) first known use 1783 : a right of a government to take private property for public use by virtue of the superior dominion of the sovereign power over all lands within its jurisdiction.----------- This would not apply to Exhausted Deeds (No one with descendants rights will come forward and present a valid claim) or Excepted Deeds because the ground would not benefit the Public in General, but only a few individuals. I don't see much that can be done under present Laws. Eminent Domain would only apply if the Governing body whose jurisdiction the ground lay needed land for Expansion of a Cemetery. Jack E. Briles, Sr. jb502000@aol.com Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator PO Box 444 New Albany, In. 47151-0444 (812) 282-6585

Jack and All, Here's the Government Code in California. Doesn't Indiana have something like this? It's not perfect, but it gives the State (and through it the counties) the ability to take legal jurisdiction over these "abandoned" cemeteries. Especially the one's with the reserved, saved and excepted from clauses where no one's willing to step up to the plate. CALIFORNIA CODES GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 180-186 180. As used herein, "property" includes real and personal property. 181. The original and ultimate right to all property within the limits of the State is in the people thereof. 182. All property within the limits of the State, which does not belong to any person, belongs to the people. Whenever the title to any property fails for want of heirs or next of kin, it reverts to the people. And here's the statutes for Pioneer Memorial Parks. Don't you think it's worth a try to get legislation like this in Indiana? CALIFORNIA CODES HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 8825-8829 8825. A city or county having a nonendowment care cemetery within its boundaries which threatens or endangers the health, safety, comfort or welfare of the public may, by resolution of its governing board, if not more than 10 human dead bodies have been interred therein for a period of five years immediately preceding the date of the resolution, declare the abandonment of the cemetery as a place of future interment, but shall permit interment therein of any person who is an owner of a plot in the cemetery on the date of adoption of the resolution or who otherwise has a right of interment in the cemetery which is vested on such date. The resolution may provide for the removal of such copings, improvements, and embellishments which the governing board finds to be a threat or danger to the health, safety, comfort, or welfare of the public. 8826. The resolution for abandonment adopted under the provisions of this chapter shall specify and declare that at any time after the expiration of 60 days after the first publication of notice of declaration of intended abandonment, the city or county in which the cemetery is located will remove such copings, improvements, and embellishments which are found to be a threat or danger to the health, safety, comfort, or welfare of the public. Notice shall be given to all persons interested therein by publication in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county or city. Publication shall be pursuant to Section 6064 of the Government Code. 8827. After the publication mentioned in Section 8826 of this code and after the expiration of the 60 days specified in the notice, the city or county shall remove such copings, improvements, and embellishments which have been found to be a threat or danger to the health, safety, comfort, or welfare of the public. 8828. After the work which the governing body, in its discretion, finds necessary and practicable has been completed, the governing body shall immediately thereafter, by resolution, which shall contain a legal description of the cemetery, dedicate such abandoned cemetery as a pioneer memorial park and may cause to be erected a suitable central memorial honoring those who have been interred in the cemetery. Upon recordation of the resolution with the county recorder of the county in which the cemetery is located, fee title to the cemetery shall vest in the city or county as the case may be. The governing body may bring an action to quiet title to the cemetery, and in the absence of fraud the resolution and the fact of recordation shall be conclusive evidence of fee title to the cemetery. Any county or city acquiring fee title to a cemetery under this section shall only use the property for the purpose of establishing and maintaining a pioneer memorial park. 8829. Thereafter the city or county shall maintain said pioneer memorial park so that it will not endanger the health, safety, comfort, or welfare of the public. Thought I'd send you the text. Giving the counties the ability to do these things doesn't mean it will happen. That's another fight, I'm sure. Sue Silver California ----- Original Message ----- From: <Jb502000@aol.com> To: <INPCRP-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 2:42 PM Subject: [INPCRP] Eminent Domain & Excepted cemeteries > > Eminent Domain (Noun) first known use 1783 > : a right of a government to take private property for public use by virtue > of the superior dominion of the sovereign power over all lands within its > jurisdiction.----------- > > This would not apply to Exhausted Deeds (No one with descendants rights will > come forward and present a valid claim) or Excepted Deeds because the ground > would not benefit the Public in General, but only a few individuals. I don't > see much that can be done under present Laws. Eminent Domain would only > apply if the Governing body whose jurisdiction the ground lay needed land for > Expansion of a Cemetery. > > Jack E. Briles, Sr. > jb502000@aol.com > Floyd County INPCRP Coordinator > PO Box 444 > New Albany, In. 47151-0444 > (812) 282-6585 > > > > > ==== INPCRP Mailing List ==== > If you know of some good cemetery related links, send them to LoisMauk@usa.net. > >