Publication: The Southampton Press

Southampton considering new graveyard protection laws

Nov 11, 09 11:37 AM   1 member recommended this article
Recommend
Comment
Email this article
Print this article
Get news alerts
RSS Feeds
Share
Shinnecock Tribal member Becky Genia makes an offering at the grave site in Water Mill on November 29, 2006 before the remains were removed and sent to the Suffolk County Medical Examiner’s office. BEVERLY JENSEN
Shinnecock Tribal member Becky Genia makes an offering at the grave site in Water Mill on November 29, 2006 before the remains were removed and sent to the Suffolk County Medical Examiner’s office. BEVERLY JENSEN

Unmarked graves and sacred sites will receive new protections under legislation currently moving through Southampton Town government.

The “Native American and Colonial Burial Site Protection Law” would establish a three-person committee to review discoveries of burial sites, human remains and funeral artifacts. The committee would also determine the heritage of the human remains—either American Indian or European—and decide what to do with the remains.

Also, companion legislation to amend town law would require an archeological investigation at sites slated for development and believed to be likely burial grounds.

Since 2005, members of the Shinnecock Indian Nation have petitioned the town for greater protection of their ancestral burial sites. Shinnecock Archeological Advisory Committee member Rebecca Genia said the new laws would protect “90 percent” of sacred Shinnecock lands threatened by development in Southampton Town. The laws, she said, are long overdue.

“I don’t mean to be sarcastic, but it really wears on your nerves when you know your ancestors’ graves are sited for development,” Ms. Genia said. “Enough is enough.”

The main responsibility of the committee would be to determine what to do with remains or funeral artifacts once they are found, Assistant Town Attorney Joseph Burke said. Choices include leaving the remains at the site or removing and reburying the remains on a different property. “Right now, the way it’s drafted, the committee would make those decisions,” Mr. Burke said. “The main issue is the disposition.”

The committee will likely include a representative of the Shinnecock Indian Nation, the Landmark Board Advisory Committee and a resident of Southampton Town with a background in archeology, Mr. Burke said.

According to the proposals, if remains or burial artifacts are discovered, the owner of the property will be required to notify the committee of the discovery. Property owners who do not notify the committee of discovery of human remains or burial artifacts will face fines up to $5,000 and jail time. Incorporated villages are exempt from the new law.

“Upon discovery, all construction would have to stop,” Mr. Burke said. “Any proposed development [at known burial sites] would have to have a complete archeological examination.”

Mr. Burke said the town and the Shinnecock Nation have worked together in drafting the new legislation. Ms. Genia hopes the legislation will be approved in spring 2010.

“[The Shinnecock] were favorable that the town was moving forward to enact something like this,” Mr. Burke said. “I think they feel like something on the local level is important, and I think the Town Board feels the same way.”

Mr. Burke said the draft legislation could be brought before the Town Board for another review this month. Before deciding whether to enact the legislation, the board must hold a public hearing.

The Shinnecock have seen numerous sacred lands destroyed by development. Grave sites were being desecrated as early as the construction of the Shinnecock Hills Golf Club in 1891, Ms. Genia said. Later, in the 1970s, a home was built over grounds where the Shinnecock buried their chiefs.

“There were no laws to protect [sacred lands],” Ms. Genia said. “There were no avenues to protect that sacred site. It was considered unmarked burials and private property.” She added, “It still hurts to this day.”

In a recent instance, developers unearthed a 2,000-year-old skull of a Shinnecock boy in Water Mill. Southampton Town agreed to purchase the property as open space, and Ms. Genia said the tribe is planning to rebury the skull at the property in the coming months.

Ms. Genia said the new law will protect “what’s left” of the open space in Shinnecock Hills, and other areas throughout the town where numerous unmarked graves still exist.

After the local law is enacted, Ms. Genia said the tribe will focus on getting a state law enacted to protect unmarked graves and sacred sites. Currently under consideration by the State Senate’s committee on corporations, authorities and commissions, the “Unmarked Burial Site Protection Act” would regulate the discovery of burial grounds, human remains and funeral artifacts. The state legislation has been under review since it was first introduced in 2005, Ms. Genia said. States including New York, New Jersey, Vermont and Wyoming do not have laws to protect unmarked graves from development, she said.

“We’re hoping with this local law passed, we could go to New York State and say, ‘Look, you need to do this,’” Ms. Genia said.

Add a comment

Nov 6, 09 2:22 PM
So, now there are 52 states?
Remsenburger (Remsenburg)
Total comments by Remsenburger: 8
Nov 9, 09 1:36 PM
We erred and the story has now been revised.
BOReilly (27east Web Editor)
Total comments by BOReilly: 47
Nov 6, 09 2:31 PM
Maybe she doesn't have all 50 cards in her deck...
MaryMac (Riverhead)
Total comments by MaryMac: 36
Nov 6, 09 2:33 PM
No Remsenburg, you have it all wrong. Other states have these laws in place already. Even more strict. How would you feel if someone bulldozed your mother?
1 member liked this comment
local (north sea)
Total comments by local: 41
Nov 6, 09 2:37 PM
Hi Local, In Remsenberger's defense.......what he was referring to was in the article Ms. Genia stated that 48 states have the law but 4 states (NY, NJ, VT & WY) did not.......do the math, that makes 52 states.......
MaryMac (Riverhead)
Total comments by MaryMac: 36
Nov 6, 09 5:40 PM
oh, i'm so sorry, so the reporter didn't do the math right, . my apoolgies to Remsenberg. I am too negative and quick to judge. I'm sorry.
1 member liked this comment
local (north sea)
Total comments by local: 41
Nov 6, 09 5:41 PM
I am embarrassed. if I could delete that comment I would.
local (north sea)
Total comments by local: 41
Nov 7, 09 1:53 AM
I think the were meaning to say out of the lower 48 states only 4 don't have this type of law in place yet. It's long overdue here in Southampton Town. Although a $5,000 fine & jail time (which would probably never happen) isn't much of a deterrent to someone with a multi-million dollar project that would have to stop upon the notification of any discovery on the property. Maybe they should consider upping the fine to something a little more formidable such as $50,000 or 100,000.
1 member liked this comment
INS (Hampton Bays)
Total comments by INS: 524
Nov 7, 09 6:21 PM
INS, I totally agree. There are past projects that have gone ahead and done what they wanted out here, taking the fines for their actions into consideration. I'm almost inclined to say that jail time should be mandatory, along with the higher fine. Maybe THAT would make an impact.
LocalMom (Southampton)
Total comments by LocalMom: 12
Nov 9, 09 10:11 AM
This legislation is long over-due & the fines should be increased. Those fines should be imposed not only on the landowner, but on the bulldozer operators as well. What is more important, though, is that these sites be documented NOW. There are enough old-timers left who know or remember where they are. There should be a reporting system set up, where someone can notify the Town of such a site. "Upon discovery" is too late.
Ms. Jane Q. Public (Southampton)
Total comments by Ms. Jane Q. Public: 79
Nov 9, 09 5:38 PM
I agree the fine should be much more and no one should be exempt nation wide
1 member liked this comment
LUVSH (Southampton)
Total comments by LUVSH: 9

Add a comment