Lafayette residents urge city to install physical plaque listing nearly 200 names recovered from potter’s field; reject QR code

Dozens of Lafayette residents urged the City Council on March 3 to install a physical plaque listing nearly 200 names recovered by local historians from the city’s potter’s field, arguing a digital QR code is not an acceptable substitute.

Frank Archeletta, who led much of the research into the cemetery, opened the public‑comment period with a moral appeal to the council to “recognize and honor all the forgotten 200 infants, children, women, and men with a historical plaque.” Several speakers said they and their families have ancestors buried at the site and described years of missed or destroyed records that made recovery difficult.

Resident Liz Platu summed up the principal objection to the current approach: “A QR code is not remembrance. A QR code is not dignity. A QR code is not justice,” she said, urging a permanent on‑site memorial so elders and those without smartphones can read names in person.

Other speakers supplied documentary context. Doug Connor and Grant Swift, who have worked with newspaper archives, mortuary records and cemetery maps, described primary and secondary sources that they say corroborate dozens of individual burials in the potter’s field. Caller David Smano told council he had documentary evidence that his grandfather, Salvador Sanmano, was buried in Lafayette after being murdered in 1929 and described past difficulty getting the city to acknowledge that family record.

Several speakers asked the council to make any plaque large enough to accept additional names if future research uncovers more burials, and they urged the city to avoid relying solely on digital links that many elderly or low‑income residents cannot access. Speakers also said they had asked earlier councils for a memorial and that the research is substantially complete.

Council did not take an immediate action on the plaque at the March 3 meeting. Instead, public comment concluded after callers had described family records and maps they say document burials, and the council moved to the consent agenda and other regular business. Multiple council members asked staff to return with more specific cost and implementation information before deciding, and several councilors suggested placing the topic on a future agenda for formal council consideration.

What’s next: Residents and the city’s cultural and historical committees asked staff to return with a cost estimate, options for plaque size and placement, and recommendations about whether to pair a physical plaque with any supplementary digital materials. The council signaled willingness to consider a formal proposal once staff provides those details.