JCC Citizens Worry GA Bill Could Mean Mausoleum is a Go

By Desiree Parker Wednesday, January 11, 2012

James City County citizens told the Board of Supervisors Tuesday evening they are worried that a local church is stalling plans for a controversial mausoleum in order to get state legislation passed to circumvent county authority in the case.

The Planning Commission voted in October to approve the plan, but the applicant has deferred taking the case before the Board of Supervisors. The church wants time to meet with many neighbors, citizens and church members who are unhappy with the project and address their concerns, attorney Greg Davis told the Board Tuesday. (The issue was not on the agenda, but citizens and Davis spoke during public comment periods).

Citizens came, some waving printouts of a new piece of proposed legislation that would curb local ability to control location and construction of a cemetery, and told the board they were concerned that the church was trying to get its way without continuing the public process needed to complete its application.

The proposed bill (House Bill 316, which is available to read here) is offered by Del. Riley Ingram (R-Hopewell) and was filed Tuesday. It amends state code relating to cemeteries so that a property owner will be allowed create a cemetery so long as any other portion of the property has been used as a cemetery.

It also clearly defines a mausoleum as a cemetery and says structures within a cemetery (such as a mausoleum) will be exempt from building code or “any other applicable code utilized by localities” as long as no one will be living in them.

York County found itself in a similar situation last year when a controversial bill was put forth in the General Assembly that was also seen as intended to circumvent local authority (read a story on that earlier issue here).

One citizen, Sasha Diggs, told the board that the proposed bill “negates all we’re trying to do.” He argued it “is bypassing the citizens of our county… this is not right.”

A woman told the board she would like to know if they were “waiting for this bill” before doing anything about the issue.

Other speakers said the church has not held any open or publicized meetings with neighbors or citizens as some members of the planning commission had asked and as the church had promised to do.

Some representatives of the church had showed up at one neighborhood meeting without letting residents know they would be there, one speaker said, but failed to show up for a meeting set just for the purpose of discussing the issue.

Supervisor John McGlennon said he was “distressed” to see legislation put forth that is a “usurpation of local authority,” regardless of whether it was crafted for St. Bede’s.

The board wrangled briefly over the larger problem the application brings up, namely how long an applicant should be allowed to defer a case and whether the board should have a policy on extended deferrals.

McGlennon said he just wanted to know “what exactly we are looking to see happening during this period” of long deferral in the mausoleum case, especially given the report that there had been no public meetings.

Davis said the church had set up a committee on the project to plan meetings, but that the holidays were busy for the church and parishioners, and that there was a “manpower issue” at the church relating to handling the case and all the various letters and concerns about it. He wasn’t aware of whether the church had scheduled any meetings with the public.

There is “no hidden agenda here,” Davis said, and his office was unaware of the legislation and was not behind the request that it be submitted.

He said in his 25 years on the job he has never had a board ask an applicant to demonstrate what work has been done during a deferral period, but said that he would talk with the church get more information about any public meeting schedules.

McGlennon asked that the board put the mausoleum on the agenda at its next meeting to discuss the schedule, and Chair Mary Jones asked Davis if he could bring the board an update on the church’s meeting plans.

Supervisor Jim Icenhour said he would like to see staff draft a policy on deferrals for the board to review.