Lois,
I think you deserve a standing ovation, even though it is very
difficult to type in that position. Seriously, you have performed a
great service to all concerned. I want to thank you on behalf of my
family. We must remain vigilant to preserve our heritage. I hope you
have a good night's sleep. You deserve it.
Connie,
Thanks for passing the news along.
Lucy Mossburg Bellville
Toledo, OH
-----Original Message-----
From: Connie Brubaker <cbrubaker(a)ldr.coolsky.com>
To: INWELLS-L(a)rootsweb.com <INWELLS-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 12:11 AM
Subject: [INPCRP-L] Lois' Report of 2/15/99 House Hearings
I am forwarding this to keep you informed of the events of today at
the
House Hearings. I appoligize if you recieve it from another list.
Connie Brubaker
>Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 20:43:21 -0800 (PST)
>From: "Lois Mauk" <lawofficeinformationsystem(a)worldnet.att.net>
>
>This is a public apology from me to the House Committee on
Agriculture,
>Natural Resources and Rural Development. I've forwarded a
copy of
this
>message to Committee Chairman Markt Lytle.
>
>I was WRONG and I'm deeply sorry for not having more faith in the
men and
>women of the Committee. My "worst fears" were
apparently unfounded
and it
>looks like the House Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources
and
Rural
>Development is going to stand up and do the right thing.
Hallelujah!
>
>I apologize for my outburst over the weekend. After I talked with
an
>attorney a few days ago who had reviewed the existing laws and
pending
>legislation, I felt so disappointed, distressed and dismayed
because
it
>looked like my deepest concern was justified and that the
Legislature was
>going to continue the practice of exempting anyone involved in any
form of
>agriculture from any proposed regulation. Apparently our prayers,
pleas and
>petitions were heard by the members of the Committee.
>
>The exclusionary language I was so concerned and worried about has
been
>STRICKEN from the bill. That is, the language which excluded
anyone
>involved in any form of agriculture from the requirements of the
proposed
>language included in Rep. Markt Lytle's House Bill 1522. Rep.
Lytle
said
>tonight that the decision to strike this language was discussed at
last
>Monday's hearing, but I don't recall hearing that.
Doesn't mean it
wasn't
>said; just means I didn't hear it.
>
>I'm now convinced that Rep. Lytle and the Committee are well-meaning
and
>good-intentioned. I believe they sincerely want to straighten out
this
>situation and put an end to cemetery abuse, neglect and
destruction
in
>Indiana. The problem is not going to be completely solved today
or
even
>this year, but we're on the verge of making serious headway.
>
>As for my report on the hearings on Monday, 2/15/99:
>
>I haven't had a chance to review my notes but here's what I recall
off
the
>top of my head from tonight's hearing. (Sorry. It's
late, I'm
tired and
>I'm too lazy to go down to my car to get my files.)
>
>A good number of lobbyists appeared, primarily the ones who didn't
have an
>opportunity to speak last Monday because of the lateness of the
hour.
>
>The homebuilders association spokesman asked for some assurance
that, if a
>cemetery were discovered on a construction site it would not
necessarily
>halt construction on the entire site but only in the immediate
area
of the
>burial place. I didn't hear any final resolution on this
query so I
can't
>say what they will or will not do on that topic.
>
>A spokesman for the Township Trustees spoke in objection to Rep.
Cleo
>Duncan's bill to take the care of cemeteries out of the hands
of the
>Township Trustees and put it into the hands of the County Cemetery
>Commissions. I'm sure there's more to it than meets the eye, but it
looked
>to me like that bill may have "died in Committee". I
think the
bottom line
>was that Rep. Duncan's concern was that -- regardless of who
does
it -- the
>cemeteries must be properly cared for. Personally, I don't
care WHO
does
>it, as long as it gets DONE! I hope the Trustees now realize how
deeply the
>public cares about this subject and if we can work WITH the
Trustees
on
>cemetery restoration projects, then more power to them.
>
>As I understand the process, all of the "good stuff" from all the
other
>house bills will get rolled into Rep. Lytle's bill (HB 1522),
including the
>language from HB 1588 (a mirror of SB 280) regarding the process
and
>procedure for moving graves.
>
>The Committee adopted my suggestion that the party moving a grave or
>cemetery be required to tender photographs of the grave markers AND
the site
>along with their report filed with the County Recorder. My
concern
is
>two-fold: (1) a lot of the markers I've seen (especially the
sandstone
>ones) aren't going to survive a move and (2) I worry about the
accuracy of
>the notetaker in interpreting stone markings. (How many of you
have
>abstracted a stone and, when you went back a second time, couldn't
believe
>how far off you were? Especially with those pesky 1s and 4s!)
>
>I forgot to suggest to the Committee the need for including a plat
of the
>cemetery site with the report filed by the moving party with the
County
>Recorder or to require that a copy of that report be given to the
public
>library in the county seat. The latter would be a terrific boon
to
public
>access to these records as so many of us can't get to the
courthouse
because
>we're working when the courthouse is open. The library, on
the
other hand,
>is usually open most evenings and weekends.
>
>I'm sure the revised bill will be posted on the Internet in the next
day or
>so. I'll let you know as soon as I find it on-line.
>
>The Committee is going to establish a Summer Study Program on this
issue
>and, as I understand it, members of the Committee will travel
around
the
>state, soliciting comments and ideas from the public on the
subject
of
>cemetery preservation. I'll keep you posted on that as the
plans
>materialize.
>
>The battle is not won yet. The amended bill adopted by the
Committee must
>now get past the vote of the House of Representatives and then be
referred
>to the Senate. There's a lot more to be done, but I feel VERY
optimistic
>about the process -- much more so than I did a few days ago.
>
>Finally, the bill to create a cemetery preservation license plate
was passed
>by the Committee. That has some exciting potential, though I
doubt
it will
>generate truly enormous sums of money. There are just so many
such
plates
>available that the potential market is somewhat diluted. I will,
however,
>be among the first in line to buy one.
>
>Rep. Lytle did express his wish that anyone with constructive
suggestions
>get in touch with him. He seems absolutely sincere in his desire
to
do
>something to correct this situation, though he does not wish to
act
in
>haste. I think the passage of HB 1522 will go a long way as a
first
measure
>to protect our pioneer cemeteries -- including the long-neglected
ones on
>private property.
>
>Rep. Lytle's amendment of HB 1522 is going to include pioneering
legislation
>making it illegal to steal or traffic in stolen cemetery art,
statutary,
>headstones, monuments, etc. Though this has not been a big
problem
in
>Indiana, it has been a increasing problem in other states. If the
bill
>passes and becomes law, the courts will have some meaningful
legislation
>with which to prosecute the thiefs and the sellers.
>
>One really exciting (and surprising) development was Rep. Lytle's
idea to
>mandate that all cemetery monuments created after 1-1-2000 must
have
>engravings indicating the name of the cemetery in which they are to
be
>placed. His thinking (which I commend as innovative) is that, in
the
>future, if those stones are stolen, they will have permanent
markings
>indicating from what cemetery they were taken. This would
alleviate
the
>future problem of trying to determine where a stolen stone was
taken
from.
>As modern stones become more ornate and more desirable by cemetery
thiefs,
>this could be a big help in finding the "home" for these
stones when
they
>are recovered.
>
>No small measure of the credit for the success of our efforts goes
to Bill
>Shaw, the Indianapolis Star-News writer who has done so much for
spreading
>the word among the Legislature, the government and the public.
Bill
was at
>the Capitol again this afternoon, but had to leave before the
session began.
>If you haven't already done so, take a minute to drop a note
to the
Star to
>thank them for publishing Bill's stories and to Bill for
writing
them.
>
>I got the impression that the Committee did not realize how easy it
was for
>those folks in Dubois County to get a permit from the Health
Department to
>perform a do-it-yourself-with-a-backhoe exhumation so they could
build their
>house on that little hill. The name of Federal Judge Hugh Dillin
(a
>descendant of the people buried in that cemetery) was mentioned
SEVERAL
>times. A friend of the Judge who happens to be a former State
>Representative spoke quiet eloquently about the level of outrage
among the
>descendants that this ever happened. I hope the Committee got the
full
>impact of his statement that the property owners got a permit to
move THREE
>graves when, in fact, there were more than 60 graves there, mostly
unmarked,
>and that, until the Trustee law was changed a year or so ago, the
Township
>Trustee was tending to that cemetery despite the fact that it was
on
private
>property. Of course, after that change went into effect, the
Trustee could
>no longer care for the site and it was shortly thereafter
"moved".
>
>Again, I apologize for blowing my top last weekend. I spoke in
despair and
>in haste. It appears that it was not necessary as the powers that
be (in
>this case the Committee) had already realized that continuing the
exclusion
>of agricultural purposes from this bill was not in the best
interest
of
>protecting these sites. Now, I just hope and pray that the
Committee will
>be successful in convincing the rest of the House and then the
Senate to see
>it this way.
>
>I think everyone came away from the meeting with renewed faith and
trust in
>the "system" and with renewed expectations for what we
CAN
accomplish. It
>ain't over, but the possibilities are certainly exciting for
all of
us.
>
>Good night.
>
>Lois
>
>
>
>==== INPCRP Mailing List ====
>If you know of some good cemetery related links, send them to
LoisMauk(a)usa.net.
>
>
>