Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cemetery Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Greenland trustees push for written burial procedures, marker re‑gridding and material storage
Summary
At a trustees meeting, members discussed clarifying sexton duties, creating a written burial procedure and job description, re‑laying plot markers to a grid, setting monument foundation standards, and storing loam and crushed stone for repairs.
The Greenland Cemetery Trustees discussed drafting written procedures for scheduling burials and sexton duties, re‑establishing straight grid lines for corner markers, and creating a small on‑site supply of loam and crushed rock to support burials and stone resetting.
Trustees said the town’s current practice leaves some responsibilities and standards unclear. One trustee who reviewed state guidance read aloud a summary of sexton duties, saying they include “the purchase of cemetery plots, management of burials, and other relevant documents. Managing, maintaining cemetery grounds, coordinating burials, including plots, preparations, grave digging, and burial activities, maintaining accurate records and plot maps, supervising work done in cemeteries.” That trustee volunteered to research and help draft a clearer job description and a step‑by‑step outline for handling internments and related paperwork.
The trustees agreed there is inconsistency between older bylaws and current practice on monument foundations. Members noted the 1957 bylaws mention a 24‑inch masonry or concrete foundation for monuments but said recent burials often receive only a base without a deep foundation. A contractor cited by a trustee suggested foundations as deep as 30 inches to reach native soils in some locations; trustees said they would consider a written guideline so families and monument companies have consistent instructions.
Several trustees described a long‑standing problem with corner markers and plot alignment. One trustee proposed selecting a less crowded section to test relaying metal corner markers to a straight grid, then stretching the method across other sections if it succeeds. The group discussed how earlier changes to walkways and site layout have shifted marker positions, leaving some granite corner markers and footstones off line. Trustees agreed correcting some markers could free up usable space and reduce future confusion about plot placement.
Trustees proposed creating a small, designated materials area—holding a few cubic yards of loam, crushed rock and stone dust—so crews or monument installers can access materials on site instead of hauling them from other towns. A trustee said five yards at a time would likely meet typical needs, with the group noting average annual burials have been low (several per year) and material usage varies accordingly.
Other maintenance items included keeping damaged corner posts upright, continuing spring cleanup, and coordinating with the local school to open exterior water spigots. Members also discussed planting options (screening shrubs or trees) on a hillside to separate the cemetery from adjacent properties and agreed to take measurements during a walkthrough before deciding species and placement.
No formal changes to bylaws were adopted at the meeting. Trustees agreed to draft the burial‑procedure outline, a sexton job description, and monument‑foundation guidance; they also agreed to mark a test section for re‑gridding and to examine potential locations for on‑site loam and gravel storage at the next site visit. The meeting ended after a motion to adjourn was made and seconded; the transcript records the motion and second but does not record a formal roll‑call vote.
