Hello Kyle,
Thank you for your comments. I do appreciate them. I enjoy lively debates.
:-)
I heard that the legislative moratorium is being thrown out. I don't know if
this is true, but that is what I heard through the grapevine.
Maybe you are right. Maybe not all 92 counties are in need of a CCC (county
cemetery commission). It makes me very happy to hear that Newton Co. is not
in need of one, and your progress with cemetery restoration is on the right
track. I am curious though...why did Newton Co. form a CCC in the first
place? I know no one was ever appointed to the CCC, but why was it formed?
As for county commissioners not caring about a CCC, yes there are some who
do think that. You are correct when you stated that the formation of a CCC
is an option with each county. But keep in mind that there are county
commissioners out there that will not form a CCC because they do not want to
FUND it. Here is the answer. Form a CCC = get money and let those people who
wish to work, get to work restoring cemeteries. Where I disagree with you is
if there is money for the taking, they will take it.
You say that many will hold township trustees responsible. How long has the
governmental entity of township trustees existed? How many have been held
accountable for their neglect of cemeteries? How many have been prosecuted
(Class C infraction)? All I know of is Knox County - that is it. The two
excuses I have heard from township trustees who neglect their cemeteries (I
am not saying all township trustees - there are good ones out there) is that
they have no money and/or they don't care. O.K. fine, then let's form a CCC
with money and appoint citizens who do care - HB 1155 solves that.
I don't think we are giving smaller counties the impression of grandeur with
this bill. It is a relatively easy formula to figure out. Whatever monies
come in with this $1 increase is divided between those counties with CCC's.
When the time comes and all 92 counties have a CCC formed, IF legislation is
changed where what money comes in from that county now stays in that county,
isn't that your argument that this would be the most fair and equitable way
to handle the $$? I don't think we are making a liar out of anyone. And I
don't think we are ripping the carpet out from under their feet.
I agree with keeping government closest to the people. That is why I am in
support of the township trustees. There are so many other things that they
do besides cemetery maintenance. So many on this list have spoken of the
lack of cemetery care by their township trustees. What is in place now is
not working. Again, I am glad Newton Co. is doing so well and most of the
township trustees are doing their job regarding cemetery care, but the fact
is many do not. That is why we need CCC's. Get people in there who do care,
who do what is best for their cemeteries and to have the funds to do it.
What will happen if township gov't does go away??? Who will take care of the
cemeteries then? The parks department? What do they know about cemetery
maintenace and restoration? At least township trustees have the resources
and education they need. The ITA has been very good about providing the
knowledge they need for cemetery care.
Also keep in mind that a CCC has the authority to restore cemeteries on
private property with permission. Township trustees do not. Where are most
of our pioneer cemeteries? On private property. I believe having a CCC is
vital, and I think most counties need them.
Again, thanks for your input.
Angela Tielking
p.s. It hasn't been the past several months we have been working on this. It
has been 2 years. :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: <KidClerk(a)aol.com
To: <INPCRP-L(a)rootsweb.com
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 7:00 AM
Subject: Re: [INPCRP] IMPORTANT! Legislative update
In a message dated 1/27/2005 9:59:40 PM Central Standard Time,
tielking(a)knightstown.net writes:
> Am I being naive again?
Angela:
Yes, I think you are. (sorry, you asked!) The four issues here are 1) the
legislative moratorium on all commissions. At this point we don't even
know
what the future of the county cemetery commission is going to be. 2)
You
are
assuming that every county has the need for a cemetery commission.
Granted, I'm
sure there are cemeteries in every county that could use work, but it
may
not
be widespread throughout every county. A future change in township
trustee in
many places could correct some of this. To be honest with you, if
two
more
of my townships would join the two that are spending money to restore
their
cemeteries, we would have no need for a cemetery commission here.
The
others are
for the most part maintained quite nicely. Maybe I'm the
exception, but
I'm
sure there are other counties where the problem is localized and not
widespread. Do we have representation from all 92 counties on this list?
Are we
assuming that every county needs a commission without proper study?
3)
You have
some counties where the commissioners and council will plainly not
care
and/or
will refuse to allow a commission, no matter where the funding comes
from.
Many will hold the township trustees accountable. Others will realize
whatever
they get from this user fee won't be enough to do much good and
they will
refuse to levy an additional tax for this purpose or appropriate already
strained
budget monies. And 4) by doing this, you could create problems for
those
smaller counties who were under the impression they would get X amount of
dollars
from this fund, who now find themselves with no revenue because their
user
fees don't amount to squat. That's kinda like ripping the carpet right
out
from
underneath them. This legislation enticed them to form a commission
with
the
promise of some money, and they went to the commissioners and council
with
this, and now you made liers out of them because they have to go back to
the
council to make up the money you just took from them. That won't
work, ei
ther.
If I remember the legislation that pertains to county cemetery commissions
correctly, the formation of a commission is optional in each county.
While I
realize the intent of this funding formula is to encourage 100%
participation in
all 92 Indiana counties, the reality is that you're penalizing
some
counties
while you're waiting on something to happen that probably never
will. And
before we become too critical of those counties who don't form a
commission,
let's make sure the need really exists. One of the arguments I
hear (and
believe
in) when talk arises of abolishing township trustees in Indiana is
that
government closest to the people is most effective. Well, maybe some of
these
counties know something we don't.
Thanks for asking...and thanks for all you've done these past several
months
working with our legislators to get us to where we are. And please,
don't
take any of my criticisms personally. In the whole scheme of things, this
issue
is quite minor compared to the positive things that can come of this
legislation.
Kyle
==== INPCRP Mailing List ====
Brad Manzenberger < INPCRP(a)inpcrp.org > is the INPCRP State Coordinator.
Feel
free to contact him directly regarding questions or comments you may
have about the INPCRP.