Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Cemetery Misuse topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenter urges county oversight after alleged misuse of cemetery land in St. Louis
Summary
A resident told commissioners the City of St. Louis is using cemetery land for concrete crushing, leaf dumping and equipment storage without approvals and asked the county to seek answers and move operations to industrial sites.
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Cemetery Misuse topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A resident raised concerns during public comment that the City of St. Louis is misusing land deeded for cemetery purposes, asking Gratiot County commissioners to press the city for answers and to protect neighbors’ health and safety.
The resident said the land “was deeded to the city in 1915 for cemetery use” and identified the property as Arlond Residential Cemetery and located near Wells Road. The commenter said the city began using the site for “concrete crushing, leaf dumping, equipment storage, and truck staging” after an expansion in 2022 and that she found no permits, site plans or approvals in a Freedom of Information Act request.
The commenter described health concerns she attributes to dust and decomposing leaf piles, saying family members “have developed health issues with dust and mold and nausea and now require ongoing allergy treatments.” She said children have accessed “100 foot piles of crushed concrete” at the site and that gates were unsecured.
The commenter also noted the St. Louis City Council serves as the cemetery board and argued that creates a conflict of interest. She asked commissioners to “help bring oversight to this issue. Please present the city for answers and support moving these operations to industrial zone sites that the city already owns.”
No formal county action was taken during the meeting on this comment; the speaker asked commissioners to invite additional community discussion and to facilitate a meeting that would present “the other side” on battery storage as well.
This entry records public comment; the board did not vote or direct staff on this matter in the meeting record.

