Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Restrictions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council clarifies legal opinion: Tinty property cannot be used as a cemetery; residents press for permanent protections
Summary
Town staff presented a legal opinion concluding the Tinty property must be used for recreation and cannot host a cemetery; residents urged deed restrictions or other protections to prevent future re‑consideration, and council members outlined the policy steps required before any change could occur.
The Farmington Town Council clarified June 9 that a newly obtained legal opinion concludes the gift terms for the Tinty property require recreational use and prohibit establishing a cemetery there. Town Manager Kathy Blonsky told the council the attorney’s opinion was "quite clear that a cemetery cannot go on Tinty property," and staff explained that any future change in use would require a policy decision by the council and likely the purchase or identification of alternate land if the town chose to establish a town cemetery.
Why it matters: Neighbors and descendants of the donor raised strong feelings about the parcel’s intended purpose. Residents asked the council to consider deeds or other long‑term mechanisms to keep the land available for recreation and to prevent the issue from being re‑litigated by future councils.
What was said: Town Manager Kathy Blonsky explained that the attorney’s analysis relied on the parcel’s grant language and restrictive covenant, which the opinion interprets as limiting use to recreation in perpetuity. "This is a legal opinion. It was quite clear that a cemetery cannot go on Tinty property," she said during the manager’s report and then walked through the practical consequences: for the town to consider a cemetery anywhere the council would first need to decide it wants to establish a town cemetery, add the matter to goals and objectives, and — if appropriate — identify or acquire suitable land.
Residents’ response: Several speakers appealed to the council for stronger assurances. Marissa Demo, who said she represents the Tinty family, described the family’s attachment and charitable contributions and urged that the property’s recreational legacy be honored: "That property was to be stayed as a park... The only thing we ask for is respect," she said. Nearby residents and petition organizers asked whether restrictive deed language or other legal mechanisms could prevent future councils from revisiting the question.
Council response and process: Council members and staff explained the legal opinion closes the immediate option of placing a cemetery on the Tinty parcel, but they also described the steps the council would need to take if the town decided in the future to pursue a town cemetery (a policy decision, potential land purchase and explicit action through council goals). Staff noted that the granting document already contains restrictive language and that a separate restrictive covenant is not necessarily needed to reach the same legal outcome.
Next steps: At this meeting the council accepted the town manager’s report; staff indicated they are not taking action on the Tinty property while the council’s goals/objectives do not include a project for the parcel. Residents who want additional protections were encouraged to stay engaged and to work with the town on clarifying options. The legal opinion and related documents will be filed in the municipal record.
