Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michigan Officials Tried To Stop a 'Green' Cemetery. They Just Lost in Court.
Reason ^ | 8.16.2024 | Joe Lancaster

Posted on 08/23/2024 12:54:25 PM PDT by nickcarraway

After a Michigan couple indicated their intent to open a green cemetery, their local township passed an ordinance to forbid it. A judge found the rule< unconstitutional.

A Michigan couple sued when their local township passed an ordinance to prevent them from opening a cemetery. This week, in a victory for property rights, a judge ruled in the couple's favor and threw out the ordinance entirely.

As Reason reported in January, Peter and Annica Quakenbush wanted to open a "green" cemetery, allowing people to bury their loved ones in a natural and environmentally friendly manner, free of chemicals like formaldehyde and coffins containing metal. They specifically intended to establish a conservation burial ground, in which decedents would be buried in biodegradable coverings like cotton shrouds or wooden caskets and the burial sites would be marked by natural landmarks like rocks or native trees. The site would otherwise remain an undisturbed forest.

The Quakenbushes bought a 20-acre plot near Brooks Township and started putting together the necessary paperwork. But local officials had other plans in mind, and in June 2023, the Brooks Township Board passed an ordinance prohibiting the establishment of all new cemeteries.

"In the past, cemeteries elsewhere have taken up large amounts of sometimes otherwise productive land," the ordinance declared. "Cemetery landscaping, grass cutting, monument repair and upkeep costs have increased dramatically over time. The problems associated with abandoned or 'orphan' cemeteries have increased throughout Michigan, and citizens look to the local municipal government…to take over abandoned or orphan cemeteries."

According to the Quakenbushes' lawsuit, after they first inquired about establishing their cemetery in February 2022, a zoning official emailed the township's legal counsel. "It is our general recommendation that new private cemeteries not be allowed within the Township except under certain very limited circumstances," the attorney replied. "Almost certainly, at some time in the future (whether in a few decades or the distance [sic] future), the family members of the deceased individuals will no longer own the parcel involved. What happens to the burials then? In all likelihood, it would devalue the property and make it unmarketable or difficult to sell."

"My response to that is, what does it matter? It's not your property," Renée Flaherty, an attorney with the Institute for Justice who represented the Quakenbushes, told Reason in January.

Besides, there were numerous mechanisms in place to prevent that outcome: Establishing a conservation burial ground in accordance with the Green Burial Council's criteria, as is the Quakenbushes' intent, requires obtaining a conservation easement—preventing the land from being used for other purposes—and partnering with a land conservancy that can maintain the property in perpetuity.

Michigan state law also requires all private cemeteries to establish an "endowment and perpetual care trust fund," with $50,000 to start and monthly deposits of "not less than 15% of all proceeds received."

"Nearly 250 people had reserved a burial plot even while the ban was in place," a local FOX affiliate reported.

The Quakenbushes sued to overturn the ordinance as a violation of due process. The township filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. This week, after hearing oral arguments, Newaygo County Circuit Court Judge David Glancy not only dismissed the township's motion but found the ordinance unconstitutional

A written order was not available at press time; a representative of the Newaygo County Circuit Court tells Reason that the court directed the plaintiffs' attorneys to prepare a ruling, which the judge will review in a later hearing.

"We're excited and feel vindicated by this ruling," the Quakenbushes said in a statement released by the Institute for Justice. "We are delighted that the judge understood that Brooks Township's ordinance violated our right to use our property and operate our cemetery."

"The Green Burial Council (GBC) is pleased to learn that Newaygo County, Michigan Circuit Judge David Glancy rejected Brooks Township's attempt to throw out a lawsuit against the 'cemetery ban' ordinance," the GBC said in a statement to Reason. "The Green Burial Council has stated before, that we believe Brooks Township's ordinance stood on a weak foundation of misinformation about green burial's negative impact on soil and water, and other similar fears. Though individuals may experience genuine trepidation about a naturally interred body's impact on their environment, local governments can easily find scientific evidence proving no such impact when burial practices are performed according to industry standards."*

UPDATE: This piece has been updated to include a statement from the Green Burial Council.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS:
Click The Pic
Hey! FReepers!
Help Fill The Tank!
How About It? Huh?
It Ain't Askin' Too Much
Ya Know....

Click here: to donate by Credit Card

Or here: to donate by PayPal

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794

Thank you very much and God bless you.


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last
To: monkeyshine

I mean, some might argue that they sound a bit hippy-dippy (https://www.miburial.com/about-us), but what exactly is morally objectionable about their professed intentions?

I don’t see anything, to be honest. Nothing about their plans are incompatible with a Christian burial.


21 posted on 08/23/2024 1:31:48 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007 (There is nothing new under the sun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

I’d have no problem being buried that way. In fact, I might prefer it. I wonder if our family cemetery has any policies regarding that; will have to check into it.


22 posted on 08/23/2024 1:32:52 PM PDT by MayflowerMadam (I'm voting for the convicted felon with the pierced ear. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine

> Why would anyone oppose this? <

It’s just the way modern government is, at all levels. Some official personally doesn’t like something. So he makes a law against it.

“I don’t like guns. Therefore, no one must have a gun. I don’t like gas stoves. I think they are bad for the environment. Therefore, no one must have a gas stove.”

That sort of thing.


23 posted on 08/23/2024 1:37:24 PM PDT by Leaning Right (The steal is real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
The Amish bury their dead in this manner. Man started from dust and we return to dust. Also wasn't Groucho a Dr. Quackenbush in one of the Marx brothers movies?
24 posted on 08/23/2024 1:37:55 PM PDT by 4yearlurker (Arise and shine,and give God the glory!-A trail cook's morning call.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

And if they’d a been Indians, not only could they establish a tutty fruity cemetery, they coulda built a casino, too. So as soon as their tribe gets the dividend checks, they could rush to the casino and lose it all.


25 posted on 08/23/2024 1:41:14 PM PDT by LouAvul (DEI = Didn't Earn It. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

news flash; people have been buried this way for thousands of years... you could be standing and/or sitting on someone’s grave at this very moment...


26 posted on 08/23/2024 1:43:21 PM PDT by heavy metal (smiling improves your face value and makes people wonder what the hell you're up to... 😁)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Why did it need to be within city limits? Buy up property
just out of town on some lovely sight, and go for it.


27 posted on 08/23/2024 1:46:22 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (I pledge allegiance to the flag of the USofA & to the Constitutional REPUBLIC for which it stands. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Bet they grown nice tomatoes.


28 posted on 08/23/2024 1:50:52 PM PDT by wetgundog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

I’m not a big fan of embalming, anyway.


29 posted on 08/23/2024 1:50:58 PM PDT by numberonepal (WWG1WGA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ultra Sonic 007
Every corpse buried became food for the worms.
So why is it a problem?

It's not a problem for me, but for some it's a BIG problem.

I guess protecting a corpse is seen as a way to conquer death, to preserve memories. Consider ancient Egypt's sophisticated embalming and elaborate memorials.

Remember the movie Po;tergeist? The house was haunted because it was built on an old graveyard. They never should have dug that swimming pool...

30 posted on 08/23/2024 1:51:06 PM PDT by ZOOKER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

As I understood it, decomposing bodies will eventually leak down to the water table.


31 posted on 08/23/2024 1:58:32 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (Propaganda keeps only governments in business, not corporations. —John Nolte)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ultra Sonic 007

Hypothetically could there be some infectious diseases in which planting an unembalmed corpse in the ground might be a source of infecting others whereas formaldehyde would have killed the infectious agent? I’d doubt it would be a common issue and likely less common than pre-embalming era when infectious diseases caused a higher fraction of deaths. But an honest review of the science might offer a few causes for requiring it. Perhaps anthrax, which certainly can persist in the environment. In rare cases handling dead bodies can transmit disease directly. That’s documented to happen with ebola with folks bleed out covered with still infectious blood. Getting TB from performing an autopsy had its own vocabulary. Embalming can’t prevent exposure before its complete, but requiring ‘modern’ rather than ‘traditional’ care of the body after death, lets ‘modern’ methods reduce significant exposure. Again, not likely needed in most cases, but we should learn from any exceptions. But better to prethink and and debate any needed exceptions in advance as generalities, than to try to apply them as seemingly arbitrary ones in emotional specific cases.


32 posted on 08/23/2024 1:59:36 PM PDT by JohnBovenmyer (They don't care. We don't scare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde

In what way? How does the body traverse through dirt, and the dirt doesn’t?


33 posted on 08/23/2024 2:00:13 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Even better.


34 posted on 08/23/2024 2:03:29 PM PDT by Larry Lucido (Donate! Don't just post clickbait!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I am for it as long as measures are taken to keep critters away. You wouldn’t want some coyote digging up Uncle Joe and gnawing on his leg.


35 posted on 08/23/2024 2:11:13 PM PDT by Gasshog (INDE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Gasshog

https://www.verywellhealth.com/why-are-graves-dug-six-feet-deep-4047407

Where Did “6 Feet Under” Come From?
The idea that graves should always be 6 feet deep has been around for a long time. There is no agreement about where this idea came from. Here are a few theories about why people may have decided to bury their dead 6 feet deep.
The London Plague of 1665
In 1665, London officials issued a pamphlet they hoped would help stop an outbreak of the plague or Black Death. Some people think this was the origin of the 6-foot standard.

The Lord Mayor of London ordered that all “graves shall be at least 6-foot deep” under the presumption that doing so would prevent the spread of disease.7 Unfortunately, the pamphlet didn’t explain the reason for the 6-foot mandate.

There are a few reasons why this probably isn’t the origin of the 6-foot standard.
Between 1665 and 1666, there were an estimated 100,000 plague victims. Many were buried in mass graves called “plague pits.” These graves were sometimes 20 feet deep or more.
The orders also didn’t say in force long. This is because the outbreak quieted in 1666 after the Great London Fire. It’s not likely, then, that the “6-foot requirement” had enough time to become a tradition.
While it’s possible that London’s 1665 plague orders created the lasting impression that graves are always 6 feet deep, it’s not likely.

Gravedigger Safety
Some people think 6 feet was just a matter of safety. Deeper graves might need bracing to prevent cave-ins. This would be especially true if the soil was sandy.

Average Gravedigger Height
The depth could have also made grave digging easier. At 6 feet, an average-sized gravedigger could still toss dirt out with a shovel. He could also get in and out without a ladder.

To Prevent Disturbing the Corpse
Grave robbery or “body snatching” was a serious problem during the early 1800s. This was especially true in England and Scotland.
Medical schools in these places needed bodies for anatomical study. Some people met the demand by digging up fresh corpses.8
Cemeteries had a lot of ways to deter grave robbers, including:
Heavy stone slabs
Stone boxes
Locked above-ground vaults
Mortsafes, iron and stone devices used to protect graves
People may have also buried bodies 6 feet deep to help prevent theft.
There was also concern that animals might disturb graves. Burying a body 6 feet deep may have been a way to stop animals from smelling the decomposing bodies.

A body buried 6 feet deep would also be safe from accidental disturbances like plowing.

To Prevent the Spread of Disease
People have not always understood how diseases spread. During disease outbreaks, they may have feared that bodies could transmit disease.
While it is true that some illnesses like cholera and tuberculosis can infect people who handle bodies, this is not true for other diseases like bubonic plague.9
Still, this may be one of the reasons why people thought bodies should be buried 6 feet deep.

Folklore/Rule of Thumb
An old “rule of thumb” says graves should be as deep as the deceased is long. This rule of thumb has unknown origins.

In the 17th and 18th centuries, the average male was 5.48 feet tall. It’s possible, then, that 6 feet was just a good rule of thumb.10


You bury the ones you are about 6 ft deep, the rest in a shallow grave.


36 posted on 08/23/2024 2:16:58 PM PDT by PeterPrinciple (Thinking Caps are no longer being issued but there must be a warehouse full of them somewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

I have often wondered if all those acres of open, rolling land could be put to better use. Most are hesitant to even broach the topic for discussion.There is profound sentimental value attached to gravesites, but it may be time to consider other options. The Dead know they are dead, whether their remains are buried, incinerated or chemically altered.


37 posted on 08/23/2024 2:18:42 PM PDT by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

That video made me laugh.

Back in 2014, I was sprinkling my mom’s ashes on the beach in Indian Rocks Florida. It was one of her favorite places - an actually normal uncrowded residential beach with few high rises.

As I took a large handful of her ashes and flung out ‘em out towards the water, a quick breeze came back and blew the finer ashes back in my face.

I sputtered for a second, wiped my face and laughed. Somewhere my mom was laughing at it too.


38 posted on 08/23/2024 2:33:30 PM PDT by MplsSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

After I’m dead just spread my body around with a wood chipper.


39 posted on 08/23/2024 2:38:41 PM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

What gives you that idea?


40 posted on 08/23/2024 2:40:06 PM PDT by lastchance (Cognovit Dominus qui sunt eius.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson