Thank you for this, Carroll. Can't the Herald ever get anything right? The decision was that the city could build a Youth Center AFTER all remains were removed. Tom Haensly wouldn't ask for an amendment to the original decision if it wasn't legal!!! The city of Snohomish is expert at throwing up smoke screens. They would love to go in there and do what they want with that site and then say, once again, "oh, we didn't know". The judge made provisions in his first decision for the family to be involved in the memorial, the city just hasn't notified them about it, so they have to once again go to court to make sure the city does what they are supposed to be doing. They can't be trusted to proceed legally and morally without somebody watching everything they do. I havn't been in touch with the family recently, I just know from watching the City of Snohomish for one short year exactly what they are doing. Unfortunately, the family probably feels they have to watch the judge too! This is just wrong all the way around. This poor family should never have had to put out all the money for a trial and to have to continue to watch the city and the court to make sure they do what was legally decided is just awful! Snohomish let them put the Senior Center on the cemetery illegally, what's to stop them from ignoring a court order? Norma Carroll H Clark wrote: > > The Herald (Everett, WA.) Sant Jan 23, 1999 Local News section 2B QUOTED > AS FOLLOWS: > Judge delays ruling on old cemetery site > Herald staff ( No name given -CC.) > SNOHOMISH -- A Snohomish County Superior Court judge delayed making a > decision on whether to amend his original ruling allowing a youth center > to be built on the former Snohomish cemetery property. > Judge Charles French said he will decide by the end of next week > whether to agree to requests from clients of attorney Thomas Haensly. > Haensley represents Carolynn Crawford and Ruth Moore, relatives of John > Low, who was buried in the cemetery in the early 1900s. > Haensly wants the judge to add amendments to his original decisiion > that require the city to determine the costs of removing remains from the > site and where that money will come from. He said family members fear > the city may not have the money to complete the project and may begin > digging at the site and then abandon it before relocating remains. > The city earlier won the right to build a youth center on the site and > the dedication of the property as a cemetery was removed. it was an > active cemetery from 1875 to the 1920s, when burials stopped. In the > 1940s, many remains were relocated when a highway was built through the > cemetery. > One set of human remains was found when soild tests were conducted on > the property earlier this year. No one knows if other remains are still > there. > Haensly and his clients also are asking to participate in the planning > of a memorial at the site. > The city's attorney, Thom Graafstra, argued that in the original > decision, the court kept continued jurisdiction over the case and has the > right to review the city's plans as the preparation of the site for > construction proceeds. > He said to allow the requests of Haensly's clients would be equal to > asking the court to vacate its original decision and change its judgment. > He added that the city has a commitment to its plans and for Haensly to > suggest that it would start the project but not finish it was wrong. > END OF THE ARTICLE FROM The Herald QUOTED ABOVE. > > Carroll of Snohomish. > * * * 30 * * * > > ___________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html > or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]