Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Dorchester County board moves to document and protect burial sites; seeks access to cemetery inside proposed solar project
Summary
Board members discussed formalizing collection of cemetery discovery forms, photographing and GPS-tagging unmarked graves, concerns about state repatriation processes under NAGPRA, and a plan to request permission to document a cemetery found inside the footprint of a stalled solar array. Members set follow-ups but recorded no formal vote on the access request.
Members of a Dorchester County burial‑site board on [date not specified] debated steps to document and protect unmarked graves around the county and considered a formal request for access to a cemetery that sits inside the leased area of a proposed solar project.
The meeting, opened by the chair (S2), centered on improving how the board handles cemetery discovery forms and on outreach and documentation for sites that are identified by residents or found during field work. "We're not just collecting data and just storing it. We are going through it and validating it," S2 said, describing current practice and the board's intention to add photographs and GPS coordinates to submissions.
Board members described several recent developments that prompted urgency. S4 reported visiting a site on Red Hill Road — near Hicks Brook Road — where headstones are visible within the footprint of a planned solar field. S4 said the solar project left a large buffer around the marked stones but recommended the board formally request access to photograph and GPS the site to preserve a record: "I think if we submitted a letter... they should be able to allow you for the other unless that's run by another tenant," S4 said.
Members agreed the project is leased by a tenant while original landowners still own the parcels, and that access requests will likely need to go to the project tenant. The board discussed drafting a letter to planning and zoning or directly to the solar project to request permission for documentation; the meeting record shows no formal vote on that access request during this session.
Several speakers urged the board to keep its role educational and avoid assuming liability for physical cleanups. S2 said the board should provide technical guidance and be present as a guest at volunteer efforts, but not organize hazardous cleanups where liability could attach.
The meeting also covered state and federal repatriation law. S1, who represents the board’s engagement with the Native American liaison committee, urged members to attend a Sept. 11 summit in Hanover on Maryland NAGPRA law and repatriation procedures. S1 recounted the Wye Island case to illustrate concerns that state processes can lead to remains being taken into state possession and repatriated only to federally recognized tribes, sometimes excluding local or state‑recognized communities. "Maryland wouldn't even support their own indigenous communities," S1 said.
The board also discussed outreach and staffing at public events. S5 moved that the board commit to a presence at the Native American Festival; members debated which fall events would best reach county residents (Native American Festival, Hurlock Fall Fest, Dorchester Showcase) and noted the board has no dedicated outreach budget. The meeting tentatively set quarterly meeting dates (July 6 and Oct. 5 at 4 p.m.) and reiterated the board's capacity limits as a volunteer body.
Next steps recorded in the meeting included drafting a letter to the solar project/tenant to request access for documentation, continuing to consolidate discovery forms and photos (Grace and Dorothy were cited as points of contact for records), and encouraging members to register for the Coalition to Protect Maryland Burial Sites meeting in Cambridge on May 2. The record shows members intend to pursue documentation and outreach; no formal ordinance or binding decision regarding the solar site was recorded at this meeting.
