Council continues family home burials ordinance, seeks expert input on setbacks and practice

The Charlestown Town Council on March 24 continued its public hearing on a proposed ordinance amending Chapter 130, which would regulate family home burials, and asked staff to seek further expertise before taking final action.

The council voted 5–0 to continue the ordinance to a special meeting on Monday, June 23 at 7 p.m. in council chambers and directed the town administrator to consult the state medical examiner, the Rhode Island Department of Health, funeral directors and other appropriate experts and report back.

Matt Dowling, the town’s on-site wastewater management specialist, told the council his recommendation for a 400-foot setback came from a literature review. He said, “The recommendation that I made for the 400 foot setback is based on 4 or 5 published sources that all recommend a 50 meter setback to a human burial,” and that those sources suggest about 150 meters (492 feet). He explained his recommendation was conservative and that the council could deviate from 492 feet down to about 400 feet for family plots.

Residents who spoke during the hearing urged the council to consider smaller lots and different burial practices. Frank Glista said restricting family plots by distance could prevent long-time local families from burying relatives on small properties: “I was born here… so the fact that somebody can come into town from another state, buy a 3 to 5 acre parcel, and can have a cemetery when a native of Charlestown can't, I think is unfortunate.” Bill Coulter cited recurring stormwater flooding on some properties and said concerns about groundwater and water table levels should be considered.

Councilors discussed distinctions raised by residents and staff, including whether embalmed remains sealed in vaults pose different groundwater risks than so-called “green” or organic burials; council members and the solicitor agreed the ordinance could include provisions limiting embalmed burials or require vaulting, and that variance or waiver procedures might be used for cases that could not meet a setback. The solicitor noted other towns handle family burial requests on an ad hoc basis and that a formal ordinance would create a clearer, standardized process.

Councilor Stokes moved to continue the ordinance and to have the administrator contact the listed agencies and stakeholders; Councilor Marr seconded. The motion passed unanimously, 5–0. The council asked staff to return with more information and model frameworks from other jurisdictions before the June hearing.