This is a detailed timeline of my interactions with PARD regarding both the cemetery rules and regulations and the Perpetual Care Trust Fund (PCTF) since September of 2013. It clearly documents the years of the continuous bureaucratic foot-dragging, equivocations, and bad faith on the part of PARD. I will continue to update this timeline.
2013
In September of 2013, my sister-in-law Tina Huckabee, heard a rumor that the Austin Parks and Recreation Department (PARD) had plans to enforce rules regarding Austin Memorial Park (AMP) and would giving families only 30 days to remove gravesite gardens, plantings, and other decorations, many of which had been in place for years. Huckabee contacted PARD on September 8, 2013, and was subsequently informed by PARD that beginning October 1, 2013, PARD would be identifying graves that were not in compliance to the rules and regulations and requiring families to bring these graves into compliance. She was also told that PARD had assumed cemetery management on April 1, 2013, and prior to this, a contractor had managed cemetery operations.
On October 17, 2013, I and a number of other members of the public appeared at the meeting of the Austin City Council to protest the sudden declaration by PARD that it would be enforcing long-neglected cemetery rules. We asserted that the current regulations, which had not been revised, publicized, or enforced since the 1970s, needed to be revisited and revised and that the public and stakeholders must be involved in developing reasonable alternatives, balancing the rights of families and friends to uniquely honor their loved ones and the need to maintain cemetery grounds. We argued that grieving families should not be forced to dismantle gravesite memorials, many of which have been in place for years, simply because PARD had failed to fulfill its duties. Further, we stated that for PARD to retroactively enforce such regulations would arbitrarily punish those with family and friends memorialized at AMP, and that these citizens should not suffer because of the city's neglect and dereliction of its duties. We also noted that there was no urgency, as PARD already had the authority to remove any neglected or abandoned memorials and dead flowers and shrubs (a copy of my testimony submitted to the City Council follows at the end of this e-mail). In response to our concerns, the City Council enacted a resolution requiring the City Manager, in collaboration with stakeholders and a working group of the Parks and Recreation Board, to evaluate whether current cemetery policies related to grave ornamentation were appropriately sensitive to personal and cultural expressions of grieving, while preserving necessary safety for cemetery workers and respect for the values of all families. This process was to be completed over six months.
Following the city council resolution, at PARD's quarterly stakeholders meeting on October 24, 2013, we were told that PARD was developing a process to come up with the new rules for the cemetery within a week to 10 days and that interested parties would be informed then how they could participate in the process.
On November 15, 2013, after repeated requests by various interested persons, including me, we were informed by PARD that it was drafting the meeting schedule and work plan for the public comment portion of this process and engaging a facilitator to coordinate the stakeholder meetings to ensure effective and transparent public participation. However, we were told that because of the upcoming holidays, these stakeholder meetings would not begin until after January 1, 2014.
2014
During the quarterly cemetery stakeholders meeting on January 30, 2014, it was announced that that the attempt to hire a neutral facilitator for the review had fallen through and that PARD was going to put out a request for bids for such a facilitator.
On January 27, 2014, I e-mailed a very rough draft of proposed regulations to Patricia Jacobson of PARD. I explained to Ms. Jacobson that I was concerned because three of the six months allotted to process of developing a compromise on the current regulations had already passed and I thought at least we could begin with something on the table to discuss. In these proposals, I tried to preserve the long-established tradition of individualizing gravesites, as well as balance the right of certain religious groups to practice their traditions and the need for families to mourn and memorialize their loved ones, with PARD's need to maintain the cemeteries. To that end, I proposed limits on the type, size, weight, number, and materials of items to be placed within a space or on a grave. Certain items, such as items with political statements or offensive language, non-weather resistant items, and bird baths and bird feeders, would be barred. The proposals made it clear that the space holder was responsible for maintaining any items or plantings within the space. However, the regulations also provided a simple process allowing PARD to remove noncompliant items. The proposals also clarified that PARD had the right to remove any dangerous or neglected materials without notification. Although the regulations grandfathered in existing gravesite memorials within their allotted space, the proposed regulations also encouraged PARD to work with space holders to bring such sites within compliance. The proposals included specific regulations regarding plantings, limiting the type and sizes of plants that may be used within a space. There are also several alternate proposals regarding benches. Finally, there were provisions requiring the publication and distribution of the regulations to avoid future conflicts.
Subsequently, I sent several requests regarding the status of the appointment of such a facilitator. On February 27, 2014, I received the following reply: "Quick email regarding the status of the Cemetery Rules Update process. We will release the Request for Quote (RFQ) for facilitation services today with the close next Friday. We will quickly then review and hopefully select a facilitator within the next week to begin the process. I regret that it’s taken this long, but we’re now ready to move forward."
It was not until April 29, 2014, when PARD finally announced that it had retained Smith and Associates to provide facilitation services and coordinate updating the rules and regulations. Interested parties were urged to provide feedback by commenting via the survey posted on Speak Up Austin, which would not be ready until May 1, 2014, or by participating in one of the open house meetings taking place in May.
The open houses were not scheduled until May 20 and May 21, 2014, I attended the open house on May 20th. There was no business meeting or discussion of proposed regulations. The open house turned out to be nothing more than an opportunity to meet various employees of Smith and Associates and to answer the same survey questions that appeared on the Speak Up Austin survey. However, at that open house, stakeholders were informed that the initial presentation of the recommended rules and regulations (RRR) would take place June 5, 2014, from 6:00 to 8:00 PM at the Zilker Botanical Garden Auditorium and that the final presentation of the RRR would be on June 18, 2014, at the same venue.
At the open house, I and several other stakeholders expressed our concern regarding the proposed schedule. First, as we pointed out, PARD had six months to initiate a process with the public to review and revise the current cemetery rules and regulations, and had done nothing during that entire time. After delaying the process for over six months, we questioned why PARD suddenly was requiring that the review process be rushed to completion in less than one month. Further, there was no provision that would allow stakeholders to actually read and review the RRR prior to the June 5th meeting, so that we could be properly informed and prepared. Stakeholders expressed their concern that they would simply be handed the RRR at the June meeting and have to try to read, review, and discuss the RRR within the two hour time period allotted. I pointed out that if the June 5th meeting was going to be a true forum permitting public input into the RRR, and Smith and Associates was sincere in its assurances that public input would be fully incorporated into the revision process, then at least some of the recommendations and comments made by the public during the June 5th meeting should be incorporated in the RRR. Therefore, sometime between the June 5th meeting and the final presentation of the RRR on June 18th, there should be at least one interim meeting to review and discuss changes made in the RRR following the June 5th meeting. I pointed out that the June 18th meeting was announced as the "final presentation" of the RRR, "final" indicating that there would be no further changes. I also noted that my brother and sister-in-law, who were very involved with initiating the protests that lead to the City Council resolution requiring the review and revision of the cemetery rules and regulations, would be out of town on June 5th and therefore will be unable to attend the initial presentation of the RRR. I stated that it was ironic, and wrong, that two important stakeholders who have waited for over six months to be part of the process now could not participate.
The resulting meetings overseen by Smith and Associates were a series of on-line surveys and a handful of meetings that were little more than allowing stakeholders to respond to such surveys, with PARD and Smith and Associates making all the decisions. Not once were the stakeholders ever actually allowed to sit down at the table with PARD and work together on some sort of reasonable compromise, which was certainly what was envisioned in the original City Council resolution. The resulting proposed rules and regulations published by PARD and its consultants were unsatisfactory and unworkable. These rules and regulations were supposed to be presented to the PARD board for approval on July 22, 2014. I and other stakeholders planned to appear at that meeting and protest not only the process by which the rules and regulations were developed, but many of the specific proposals as well. That meeting was canceled and the stakeholders were later told that instead the rules and regulations would be developed as part of the Cemetery Master Plan.
I contacted PARD multiple times regarding the status of the rules and regulations revision, and was always told that PARD was focused on the Master Plan, but would be returning to the rules and regulations process when the Master Plan was completed. However, many months later, when the draft of the Master Plan was made public, the only reference to the current status of the rules and regulations revision was on page 505, which stated: "Since the master plan scope of work already includes a review of the rules for grave ornamentation, PARD asked the master plan team to expand the scope of their work. McDoux Preservation. . . drafted a revised scope of work, to include an analysis of the data gathered through the Smith/Associates public engagement process, a new review of best practices, the development of criteria for the evaluation of alternatives, and a few examples of such alternatives. That work is being completed separately from the master plan but may be appended to it at a later date."
I again contacted PARD and pointed out that this appeared to mean that McDoux Preservation was reviewing and revising the cemetery rules and regulations without involving the stakeholders in the process, and was acting in violation of the October 17, 2013, resolution. I noted it therefore could be argued that any rules and regulations that might later appended to the Master Plan would be invalid, void, and without any force and effect. PARD’s response was that there would be an update on the process "very soon."
2015
August 2015, the City of Austin Historic Cemeteries Master Plan is released. Ironically, regarding AMP, the Plan made recommendations in line with those previously proposed by me and other stakeholders: establish turf composed of a mix of native grasses; encourage the establishment of groundcovers within curbed or walled family plots to reduce the amount of mowing and trimming required; and avoid using riding mowers and metal core trimmers within 12 inches of markers and plot enclosures.
2016
There was no further action by PARD until over three years later when in October, PARD announced a community meeting "regarding the Cemetery Rules Update Process." I sent an email to Tonja Walls-Davis, PARD cemetery operations manager, on October 23, 2016, stating that I was looking forward to attending meeting on October 27th, as well as meeting her. I said that I did not know how familiar she was with the history of the cemetery rules and regulations revision issue, but noted that I had been involved from the very beginning. In the e-mail I gave Walls-Davis a detailed timeline of the revision process, as well as a copy of my testimony before the City Council on October 17, 2013, and asked her to contact me if she had have any questions or needed more information.
On October 27, 2016, when PARD held a public meeting announcing that it was reinitiating the rules and regulations process. At that meeting the public was told that PARD did not have to have City Council approval of the proposed rules and regulations and that PARD would have new rules and regulations in place by January of 2017.
2017
In April of 2017, PARD announced it had partnered with Conservation Corps “to facilitate the dialogue with the community regarding how to best update the Cemetery Rules.” These meetings took place April 10, 18, 25, 26, and 27, 2017.
There was no further action from PARD until it announced in October 2017 that it would be posting draft cemetery rules and regulations and that there would be only two community meetings, October 23 and 26, 2017, to discuss the proposal.
December 12, 2017, PARD posted the proposed rules and regulations at the City Clerk’s office, with the public comment period to end Friday, January 11, 2018. However, PARD’s website made no mention of the comment period for the rules and failed to set forth the deadline for comments. PARD’s e-mails to a small select group of stakeholders stated that their comments on the draft cemetery rules must be emailed to D’Anne Williams at Danne.Williams@austintexas.gov. by January 11, 2018. However, using this link resulted in an automatic response stating that the message could not be delivered because the address is invalid and that this is a permanent error. PARD did not correct the link until January 10, 2018, one day before the end of the comment period. A single small sign posted at AMP stated that the public comment period is from “December 12, 2017—January 12, 2018.”
2018
January 11, 2018, I submit comments regarding the proposed rules.
February 23, 2018, City of Austin Cemeteries sends out an e-mail stating that it has received over 100 comments on the proposed rules and that responses to all comments will be posted on its webpage, with e-mails sent to all those who submitted comments. Responses are expected to be completed by early March. The e-mail further states that due to an inadvertent omission, the Parks and Recreation Department Director has decided to extend the public review process of the proposed rules, letting the final rule adoption date of February 19 for this proposal to pass, and that the re-posting of the revised rules will commence a new 31-day public review. I, my brother Steven Weintraub, and my sister-in-law, Tina Huckabee, never received the promised e-mails responses, despite the fact we had all submitted comments.
March 2, 2018, I filed an integrity violation complaint with the City Auditor regarding the city’s perpetual care trust fund, including the failure to properly implement the fund in accordance with state and city law and the apparent waste and fraud regarding fund expenditures
March 30, 2018, PARD sent out an e-mail stating that based on feedback PARD had received several revisions were made to the Draft Cemetery Rules. The e-mail states that these revised rules are currently under review will be posted to the webpage as soon as final approval is received. A link is provided to staff responses to public comments. However, the linked website is almost unreadable and difficult to navigate.
April 13, 2018, City of Austin Cemeteries sends out an almost identical e-mail to that of March 30th.
In an April 26, 2018, e-mail Ms. McNeeley stated that she “was able to meet with PARD team members who were most informed regarding this issue. Despite the knowledge in the room, there are a few team members I need to talk to outside of PARD regarding this subject. This process will require a bit more time. I fully intend to provide you a comprehensive response, and need additional time to gather information. Please stand by and I continue to update you regarding my progress until a comprehensive response is completed.” I responded that while I appreciated her getting back to me, I did not understand why this issue needed any further study, as Title 10, Article 2 (Perpetual Care Trust Fund), of the Code has been in effect since 1992, and sets forth in great detail the policies and procedures for implementing PCTF. I also stated that it was very clear to me that PARD has acted, and is acting, in violation of state and local law and its only possible response is to both immediately implement the city ordinance as intended and to fully account for every deposit to, investment of, and expenditure from PCTF over the past 26 years. Further, I stated that until PARD complies fully with both the state and local law regarding the PCTF, any action by PARD regarding changes to the cemetery rules and regulations should be put on hold, especially as to existing gravesite gardens and memorials, as any such rules and regulations must take into account and incorporate PCTF. Ms. McNeeley replied that “additional time is needed because . . . the city municipal code designates specific responsibilities associated with the perpetual care fund to various departments” and that in order for her “to provide a complete and comprehensive response to your inquiry, it is necessary . . . to consult with colleagues” outside of PARD. Ms. McNeeley stated that she was committed to giving me a response and that she would be in touch soon.
On May 8, 2018, I received a response by Ms. McNeeley stating that she intends to “facilitate an operational review of the fund and establish clear administrative processes to allow for clarity in the Perpetual Care Fund’s purpose, administration and allowable uses.” She references issues such as historically deficient record keeping, failure to follow City code procedures, and the lack of structure for accounting of plot specific maintenance investments. Ms. McNeeley promises among other things, a full internal audit to account for records associated with PCTF investments, to revise Code provisions, and explore allowable options for cemetery maintenance to ensure efficient procedures and compliance with PCTF intent. She acknowledges that “this information may be disappointing,” but states that PARD “shares in the disappointment.” Ms. McNeeley states that “now that there is a full understanding of the challenges, PARD can work effectively to fix Code, procedures and fund administration to ensure effectiveness and efficiency in the future.” However, McNeeley also declares that “it is not appropriate to accept a donation to the perpetual care fund at this time. Upon completion of the above action plan, PARD and the City of Austin will be in a better position to accept donations.” There is no information regarding any schedule or timeline concerning the “action plan.” Considering that the revision of the cemetery rules and regulations, which initiated my research, has been delayed and dragged out by PARD for over four years, it is questionable whether PARD is going to be in compliance with state law or the Code regarding PCTF anytime in the foreseeable future. Further, PARD’s refusal to accept donations and implement trusts for specific gravesites is a blatant violation of both state and local law. The law is very clear concerning PARD’s current duties regarding PCTF and there is no legal doctrine tolling compliance with the law on the grounds that a public entity “needs to get its act together.”
May 10, 2018, I testify before the City Council regarding PARD’s failure to properly implement the perpetual care trust fund, its continuing violations of state and city law regarding this trust, and the apparent waste and fraud regarding fund expenditures. After the meeting Kimberly McNeeley, the acting director of PARD, approaches me and specifically tells me that there was never any intention that the rules would apply to existing graves.
May 25, 2018, in an email, PARD stated that proposed cemetery rules have been resubmitted to the City Clerk’s office, and the 31-day posted public review begins Friday, May 25, 2018 and runs through Sunday, June 24, 2018. PARD failed to put any public notice of the posting of the new proposed rules or regulations or comment period on its website. This was not rectified until June 19, 2018, less than one week before the end of the public comment period, after I personally pointed out this lack of public notice to Anthony Segura, assistant director, PARD.
June 18, 2018, an e-mail from PARD declared that the end of the public comment period runs through June 22, 2018, even through the posting with the City Clerk states that it runs through June 24, 2018, as did the May 25, 2018, email from PARD. This too was rectified after I personally brought it to the attention of Mr. Segura, but again not until June 19, 2018.
June 23, 2018, I submit comments regarding the proposed rules.
August 2, 2018, Rule R161:18.08 is posted at the City Clerk’s Office, announcing the final adoption of “Rules for Cemeteries Owned and Operated by the City of Austin” by the Director of PARD.
August 13, 2018, a group of stakeholders meet with Kimberly NcNeeley, the acting director of PARD, and Anthony Segura, assistant director, regarding the posted rules and regulations, at Russell’s Bakery and Coffee Bar at 3339 Hancock Drive. The stakeholders express anger and disappointment that their comments were clearly not seriously considered and not one of their recommendations was adopted. Among the issues discussed were the failure of PARD to comply with the City Council resolution enacted October 17, 2013, failure of the rules and regulations to grandfather in existing memorial gardens, the continuing failure of PARD to properly notify the public and stakeholders and the lack of public meetings, the fact that the new rules and regulations effectively discriminate against Jewish citizens, and PARD’s continuing violations of state and city law regarding the perpetual care trust fund. McNeeley and Segura respond that the incorrect version of the rules was adopted and posted. They asserted that they had forwarded revisions to the Legal Department but due to a communication error these revisions were not incorporated in what was intended to be the final version of the rules. McNeeley and Segura stated that while they would investigate how to withdraw the rules, they recommended that the stakeholders file appeals regarding the adoption of the rules with the City Clerk’s Office. After discussion, McNeeley agrees that the rules and regulations process had been seriously flawed and failed to involve the stakeholders and the public and states that she will reopen the process with more public involvement and input. Because much of the work has already been done, she says that she thinks the process could be completed by the end of the year.
August 31, 2018, following numerous appeals filed by citizens, Rule No. R161-18.08 is withdrawn. Under the withdrawal, PARD is afforded additional time to engage with community members and stakeholders to refine the rules and to hold additional community engagement meetings, to be completed by the end of calendar year 2018. No later than March of 2019, PARD is directed to officially adopt the Administrative Rules in accordance with Chapter 1-2 Adoption of Rule.
September 21, 2018, Anthony Segura e-mails me to update me on the rules process, stating that he will be “meeting with Legal this week to further review your proposed edits and am hoping to have that completed soon.” He states that his intent in the following weeks is to engage in a community event to propose the changes, upload the document to the cemetery website along with a tracking log to allow users the opportunity to make changes and to provide comments, and seek Austin Memorial Park and or Oakwood community engagement for additional outreach
In an October 17, 2018, e-mail, to me, Anthony Segura stated that the legal department has completed additional analysis of the newly proposed rules as they relate to the Cemetery Master Plan, but that he has “been working on a comparative analysis of other municipal cemeteries, as well as private cemeteries, to make sure that we are addressing all issues and to get additional ideas for proposed signage.” He noted that he will “conclude my meetings next week and will be finalizing the rules and will reach out to you then for your input. Segura asked if there could be a meeting with stakeholders to get their opinion before conducting “a full blown citizen’s community engagement?” I replied that a meeting with the stakeholders would be an excellent idea and suggested early November to avoid getting too close to the Thanksgiving holiday, when many people will be busy or out of town.
November 27, 2018, Anthony Segura in an e-mail to me states that “PARD is almost ready to post the rules for review, and is in the process of finalizing some language before moving forward with a final review with our Legal department. It will be our intent to continue moving forward with citizen engagement even if it means continual discussions after the new year. PARD wants to ensure that we have addressed all previous issues and concerns, realizing the sensitivity of these rules, and therefore recently completed a comprehensive and through analysis review.” He stated that he would be reaching out to the stakeholders group soon for further discussion.
December 4, 2018, in response to an e-mail from me, Anthony Segura replies that the rules update and legal interpretation of the Perpetual Care Trust Fund are with the City of Austin’s Legal Department review. He states that he anticipates “receiving their response soon and we will set up meetings accordingly with key stakeholders as soon as possible. Be advised that I want to make sure that enough time is allowed so that no one feels rushed and realize the challenges with the Holiday’s coming up. I anticipate the start of citizen dialogue after the new year once I receive feedback from our Legal Department, if not sooner.” He also says that he will set up another meeting with stakeholders for further discussion soon.
2019
January 14, 2019, in an e-mail to me Anthony Segura states that he has been in contact with the Legal Department for an update on their comprehensive review and that he has been informed that they are still working on the proposed rules.
On February 12, 2019, I e-mail Anthony Segura regarding the current status of the proposed rules and regulations process and the Austin Perpetual Care Trust Fund. I also echoed Sharon Blythe’s concern over the current Interment Services contract (IS), as it it was my understanding that the owner of IS, Gene Bagwell, was also the owner of Intercare Corporation (IC), with whom PARD had terminated its contract in April of 2013, in part because IC continued to failed to fulfill its contractural duties. I stated that I did not understand why PARD has granted what is essentially the same company such a lucrative new contract when it has previously terminated doing business with that company based on PARD’s dissatisfaction with that company’s prior performance. I also expressed concern regarding the Austin Memorial Park landscape options to screen and mitigate noise and intrusion by the Mopac Corridor.
In his February 13, 2019, e-mail response, Anthony Segura replied that the Law Department has recently been contacted regarding the status of their legal review of the City’s proposed revisions of the Cemetery Rules and Regulations, and that due to their department having to continue to review a large number of City contracts for multiple departments, their legal analysis of the proposed updated cemetery rules has not been completed. He stated that the Legal Department has told him that review of the proposed cemetery rules and regulations is one of their priority projects to be completed as soon as possible. Segura stated that upon completion of their comprehensive legal assessment, PARD will provide an online citizen review of the proposed changes, and will set up a citizen engagement meeting to provide an opportunity for citizens to discuss the proposed rules for our cemeteries. He asserted that PARD will also set a date to meet with citizens individually, who were unable to attend the citizen engagement meeting for further discussion before moving towards adoption. Finally, he stated, a separate meeting will be scheduled to review and discuss the proposed rules with cemetery partners as previously discussed. Regarding the perpetual care trust fund, Segura said that PARD continues to work closely with the Legal Department. He further stated that PARD is working on determining how to be allowed to utilize more of these funds now, rather than being allowed to only spend the accrued interest as permitted under state and city law. Segura said that the Legal Department is also continuing to seek legal review of Chapter 712 (Perpetual Care Cemeteries), Texas Health and Safety Code. He explained that that contract continuation with Interment Services Inc. was for a three year extension, as PARD plans to transition all interment services to City personnel within these next few years. Finally, Segura said that PARD does not have any new or updated information on the landscape options referenced in the email.
February, 13, 2019, I responded to Anthony Segura by e-mail regarding his response, especially concerning the Perpetual Care Trust Fund. I explained that Chapter 712, Health and Safety Code, applies to private perpetual care cemeteries operated by a corporation and that the state laws regarding municipal perpetual care trusts are under Chapter 713, which expressly grants a municipality that owns or operates a cemetery the authority to create a perpetual care trust fund. I stated that if this is an example of the advice PARD is recieving from its legal department, that I am very concerned about the entire rules and regulations process. I further expressed concern regarding Segura’s statement that “PARD is working on determining on how to be allowed to utilize more of these funds now, rather than being allowed to only spend the accrued interest.” I stated that this would not only be a blatant violation of state and local law, but a betrayal of those families who donated to these funds with the promise by the City of Austin that the funds would be used for the perpetual care of their loved ones’ graves.
February 13, 2019, Anthony Segura responds to me by e-mail that he will forward my “comments to the Legal Department for review.” When I responded that I wished to meet with the legal department face-to-face, Segura stated that he will relay this as well.
February 25, 2019, in an e-mail Anthony Segura informs me that he had met with "legal last week to further review" his proposed changes to the cemetery rules and that he hoped to receive their final feedback within the next one to two weeks. He also stated that he had had forwarded my request to meet with the City of Austin Legal Department.
February 25, 2019, Kimberly McNeeley informs me by e-mail that she has been reassigned to an interim leadership role at Animal Services in late January and that Sara Hensley has returned as the Director for PARD.
February 26, 2019, in an e-mail Anthony Segura informs me that the Law Department is working to respond to my questions regarding the Perpetual Care Fund and that a written response will be provided to me as soon as possible.
February 26, 2019, I met with Keith Salas of the City Auditor’s Office after learning that the integrity violation complaint been dismissed (because the person who had investigated the complaint was no longer with the office, there was no information regarding why the complaint had been dismissed). I reviewed the material and documentation that I had compiled with Salas. Salas stated it was apparent that something was wrong and that he will reopen the investigation.
March 26, 2019, I contacted Anthony Segura by e-mail expressing my concern that the August 31, 2018, withdrawal of Rule No. R161-18.08 provided that under the withdrawal, PARD "is afforded additional time to engage with community members and stakeholders to refine the rules and to hold additional community engagement meetings, to be completed by the end of calendar year 2018. No later than March of 2019, PARD is directed to officially adopt the Administrative Rules in accordance with Chapter 1-2 Adoption of Rule.” I noted that it was nearly at the end of March of 2019 and there has been no engagement of the community and stakeholders regarding refinement of the rules and certainly no “additional community engagement meetings.” I asked for affirmation from both Segura and then PARD director Ms. Sara Hensley that PARD had no intention of adopting any cemetery rules and regulations at the end of this month pursuant to the August 31, 2018, withdrawal, especially in light of PARD’s failure to comply with the provision regarding engaging stakeholders and the public and holding additional public meetings.
March 27, 2019, Anthony Segura responded to me that no changes to the cemetery rules will be implemented until citizen engagement has been concluded and feedback has been solicited. He further stated that the "City of Austin takes the cemetery rules process very serious and will not make any quick decisions without working with our cemetery partners and citizens.”
May 8, 2019, I e-mailed Anthony Segura that I had still not heard from anyone, including the legal department.
May 8, 2019, Anthony Segura respond that "PARD’s assigned lawyer has completed their legal analysis of the Perpetual Care Fund and submitted to the City Attorney for final review.” He further assured me that "nothing will be implemented until we complete a thorough citizen engagement review."
December 8, 2019, I visit my parents’ and niece’s graves to discover notices posted on all three graves stating that “(t)his burial site are (sic) in violation of the City of Austin’s Cemetery Rules and Regulations” and requesting that I review the rules and promptly remove the items within 30 days or the city will remove and dispose of them (there was nothing indicating just which items are allegedly in violation). The notices were posted November 25, 2019, the week of Thanksgiving, and the same day I flew out of town to visit family.
December 8, 2019, I e-mailed Anthony Segura informing him of the notices and stating that this is an outrageous and a complete and utter betrayal of over six years of trying my trying to work and engage PARD. I stated that I cannot put in words just how angry, hurt, and shocked I am by this action on the part of PARD, which shows an utter lack of integrity on its part, as well as a complete uncaring disregard for the citizens of the city. I stated that I would consider legal action, including an injunction, revisiting my complaint with the City Auditor about abuse of the Perpetual Care Trust, and contacting my elected state officials, as well as the Texas Attorney General’s and Governor’s Offices. I copied all members of the Parks and Recreation Board, as well as the Mayor and City Council members Alison Alter and Kathie Tovo, as well as McNeeley, Hensley, and Walls-Davis.
December 9, 2019, I received an e-mail from Segura stating that PARD “currently operates under the 1978 cemetery rules that were adopted by Council under Resolution 780504-22 and continues to work with the Law Department to review and revise those rules, including the ornamentation policy. The Cemetery staff inadvertently tagged your lot areas as out of compliance, and I would like to apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.” He further said that “PARD continues to work with the Law Department on the cemetery rules revisions, and it is our intent upon their completion, to engage stakeholders and citizen groups by scheduling meetings at which they may provide feedback on the revisions. PARD will also provide additional engagement opportunities at the cemeteries for those citizens who are unable to attend those meetings. Further, the revised rules will be posted online to solicit citizen feedback prior to their final adoption and implementation.” As to the Perpetual Care Trust Fund, he stated that “PARD continues to work with Law to identify a long-term solution.” Segura promised that “PARD will be in contact with stakeholders as soon as we are ready to discuss the revised rules further. In the meantime, thank you for your continued patience.”
On December 11, 2019, I received an e-mail from Dawn Lewis, Chair, PARD, stating that she would like to touch base with me to “garner a better understanding of the history” of the cemetery rules and regulations process and where I would like to see the rules/policy land in the future. I responded that same day stating that I would be happy to meet with her. I noted that I was moving into a new home on Friday, but would be free to meet with her sometime after that. I attached a copy of the timeline I put together documenting my interactions with PARD regarding the cemetery rules and regulations from September of 2013 to date and said that if she needed any other documentation to please let me know, as I have kept very detailed records.
2020
January 20, 2020, I met with Dawn Lewis at Russel’s Bakery on Balcones. We discussed the history of the cemetery rules and regulations and I gave her my brief regarding the Perpetual Care Trust Fund. I offered to meet with the PARD board to discuss my research.
November 13, 2020, Stephanie Caldwell contacted Tina Huckabee by email through Tina’s gardening blog, stating that she was doing research on-line regarding the destruction of personal items at AMP when she came across the website. She said that she has family members are buried at AMP, including her husband and father, and items were recently removed and thrown away.
November 14, 2020, Tina responded through email that that PARD is still trying to make changes without grandfathering in the grave decorations that have been at AMP for decades. She said that typically, someone in the chain of command makes a statement, or sends and email, or otherwise “riles up” the cemetery stakeholders. There is a meeting, the stakeholders are somewhat mollified, and then after months pass, perhaps even a year, and then someone else in the bureaucracy makes another statement and the same pattern occurs, but with a whole new set of officials. Huckabee mentions my involvement in the process.
November 16, 2020, Caldwell responds to Huckabee, stating the AMP employees have been removing and discarding benches, decorations and other items from the graves. She stated that families have not been contacted and instead are expected to learn about it when they visit the cemetery. She asked to contact me.
On November 16, 2020, I email Huckabee and Caldwell stating that I went by AMP that day for my weekly visit/plant watering and noted that they do have a sign up that holiday decorations will be removed starting November 15th. However, I still saw flags from Veteran’s Day. I said that all the more permanent grave decorations I was familiar with (wind chimes, statues, pinwheels, benches, etc.) still seem to be in place and that I slowly drove around and did not see any wholesale removal of items. I noted that PARD is not good about notifying families in part because their record keeping is so abysmal, they have no idea who owns or oversees any grave plot (plus, they really do not like dealing with the public).
The same day Caldwell responded that the removals are taking place in Section 6. She stated that she has a tag written by cemetery personnel dated 10/20/20 that she removed from the bench that was confiscated from my husband's grave. She explained that she and her daughter had visited their husband’s and father’s and other relatives’ graves the previous Wednesday when the daughter was in town. They were also there to try to pick up wind chimes that had been removed previously by grounds personnel. She said that they discovered that not only had the bench been removed from her husband's grave but many so had neighboring benches and decorative items. They subsequently found out that the confiscated wind chimes had been thrown away by cemetery personnel. Caldwell stated that she had several conversations with a man named Jorge about the removal of benches, decorations, plants, pots, etc. Jorge told her that AMP personnel will be removing personal items, including benches, and that if a family does not retrieve them within 30 days after confiscation, the items will be discarded.
I replied to Caldwell that this sounds much more serious. I sent her a copy of the timeline I have kept of the controversy. I told Caldwell that she needs to contact the city council and the mayor’s office, as well as all the board members of the Parks and Recreation Department (PARD) and gave her the links. I said that I wondered whether PARD is using the Covid-19 epidemic as a cover. I informed Caldwell that something similar happened to my family in December of 2019, and provided her with a copy of the email I had sent to Anthony Segura, who was then assistant director of PARD.
November 17, 2020, Caldwell responds by email thanking me for the information. She included a of the tag that was attached to her husband's confiscated bench. She noted that AMP personnel listed an incorrect name and that this was also the case for the wind chimes that had been discarded, but under a different name. She said that AMP employees have photographs of the gravesites, including her husband’s grave showing he bench. She said that she and her daughter had to load the heavy bench into their car. Caldwell noted that the office has been closed for months due to Covid-19 and in her experience they frequently do not answer the phone. She said that she has left messages that were never returned. Caldwell said that she implored Jorge to contact the family of a young woman buried near my husband who passed away in 2003. Over the years she said that she had watched how often the family came to pay tribute to their daughter/sister/wife. He refused and Caldwell stated that everything had been removed, including a beautiful butterfly bench and plants. Whether the cemetery confiscated the items or the parents were able to retrieve everything in time, she did not know. She said that the gravesite is now a barren, unwelcoming place.
On November 19, 2020, I sent an email to Mayor Steve Adler and members of the City Council, copying all members of the PARD Board. I noted that once again I am forced to contact city official regarding the continuing unauthorized actions by the PARD, and that I am not only angry, hurt, and shocked by the utter lack of integrity of the cemetery division and its complete uncaring disregard for the citizens of this city and the rule of law, frankly, I am exhausted. I noted that since October 17, 2013, when the City Council enacted a resolution requiring that the City Manager, in collaboration with stakeholders and a working group of the Parks and Recreation Board, re-evaluate the cemetery policies related to grave ornamentation, I and other citizens have tried in good faith to engage with PARD, only to be met with unwarranted delays, bureaucratic foot dragging, equivocations, and broken promises. I stated that after over seven years and tens of thousands of wasted taxpayer funds and countless hours of citizens’ time and efforts, we are apparently right back to the situation that triggered the October 17, 2013, resolution. I explained that I had recently been contacted by Caldwell. I explained that she and her daughter visited the grave of their husband and father in Section 6 of Austin Memorial Park (AMP), where he has rested since unexpectedly passing in 2013, only to discover that the bench and decorations they had placed on his grave had been removed. In fact, they learned that memorial items on neighboring graves had also been removed, confiscated, and in some cases destroyed or discarded. I said that Caldwell was told by a AMP employee that they were going to continue to remove personal memorial items from gravesites and that if the families did not reclaim them in 30 days, the items would be simply tossed out. I noted that Caldwell received no notice of the confiscations. I said that the fact that this is happening at all in face of the City Council resolution and the years of negotiating with PARD is bad enough, but that this is occurring during a pandemic when peoples’ movements and travel are limited is especially egregious.
I noted that in August of 2018, I and other stakeholders met with Anthony Segura and Kimberley McNeeley. At this meeting McNeeley agreed that the rules and regulations process had been seriously flawed and failed to involve the stakeholders and the public and stated that she would reopen the process with more public involvement and input. Since that time, I have periodically tried to get an update on where we stand regarding the process, only to be repeatedly told that it is being reviewed by the “Legal Department” and that within the next few weeks there would be community events engaging with the public. I was promised that PARD would be reaching out to me and other stakeholders for further discussion. I and other stakeholders have been repeatedly reassured by PARD that no cemetery rules and regulations will be implemented without a complete and thorough citizen engagement and review. To date, PARD has utterly failed to fulfill these promises.
I also explained that I have not had any better response regarding PARD’s continuing and blatant violation of state and city law regarding PCTF. To date, there has been no implementation of the 1992 ordinances establishing the PCTF and I and other stakeholders have been illegally barred from donating to the PCTF for the maintenance of our loved ones’ gravesites. Again, I have been told repeatedly that the issue is being reviewed by the law department and I will be receiving a written response. Further, I noted that I have twice filed complaints with the City Auditor’s Integrity Unit regarding the PCTF, but have received no response.
I noted that as I have asserted repeatedly before, the rules and regulations are not included in the City of Austin Code of Ordinances. They therefore lack the authority of law and can be waived by failure to timely enforce them. Having failed to publicize or enforce these rules and regulations for over three decades, despite open, obvious, and continuing violations, PARD has effectively waived such rules and regulations and no longer has any legal right to try to retroactively enforce them. Seizing and destroying citizens’ property without any adequate notice under the guise of enforcing long-waived rules is illegal and unconstitutional. Further, considering overall the horrendous neglect of cemeteries like AMP, with its sagging and rusted chainlink fence, dead trees and bushes, toppling headstones, and eroding grounds, it is blatantly hypocritical of PARD to try to assert that a carefully and lovingly maintained garden or ornamental bench is somehow detrimental to the appearance and dignity of the cemetery.
I said that considering that it is overseeing the last resting places of beloved family members and friends, one would think that the cemetery division would be the most empathetic, transparent, and open department within PARD. Instead it has shown itself to be utterly callous, overly bureaucratic, and completely opaque in its dealings with the public. I noted that I worked for nearly 24 years with the Texas Senate and that the cemetery division is the most obfuscated and obdurate public office I have dealt with. I demanded that: the City of Austin order the cemetery division to stop all removal of personal memorials from graves, except when immediately necessary to protect employees and the public from imminent harm; the cemetery rules and regulations process be revisited and restarted. I said that while currently public meetings are not possible (which is further reason why no action should be taken regarding memorial garden at items at the city cemeteries), as soon as it is safe the process should be reopened with full public notice and engagement; the PCTF be finally implemented after 28 years; and the city auditor investigate and throughly audit all expenditures from the PCTF and issue a report to both City Council and the citizens of Austin. If any expenditures were made in violation of state and city law, criminal action must be implemented and restitution required. I concluded that if no prompt and conclusive resolution is forthcoming, I will inform my elected state representatives of PARD’s blatant violations of state statutes regarding PCTF, as well as file complaints with the Texas Office of the Attorney General and the Office of the Governor of Texas. Further, I noted that in the summer of 2018, prior to meeting with Segura and McNeely, I had created a website to publicize the unethical and potentially illegal actions of PARD regarding the cemeteries and PCTF. After our meeting, in reliance on their promises, I did not publish the website. However, I said that I am currently updating the website and plan to relaunch the site effective November 30, 2020, if this matter is not addressed and resolved.
The same day Caldwell contacted me by email and said that she had spoken with the person in charge of maintenance, who said that he would research what happened and get back with her. She said that she will let me know if she hears back from him. Caldwell said that he did seem to acknowledge that the Covid-19 situation probably calls for changes in policy. She noted that whatever the policies are, they are unclear, such as confusion regarding the "time limits" to pick up confiscated items and what is removed, why, and when. She said that she was told that wind chimes presented a potential hazard to their lawn mowers
November 23, 2020, I received an email from Laura Cottam-Sajbel, District 9, Parks and Recreation Board. She stated that she was distressed by the news in my letter. She stated that there was a board meeting scheduled for December 4, and while open meeting rules prohibit the board from discussing it without prior notice, she would will ask for a report from McNeeley and see if the board needs to put it on the next agenda in order to discuss this issue further. Sajbel said the the cemeteries are not only an important part of the city’s history, they are also very personal places for the families whose loved ones are buried there. She stated that this this issue seems to have dragged on for years.
I responded the same day that thanking her for her response. I emphasized that I and other stakeholders agree that there need to be some reasonable regulations to ensure the safety and sanctity of the cemeteries. I noted that all the stakeholders have wanted for over the past seven years is to sit down at a table with members of PARD regarding the development of reasonable cemetery rules and restrictions, as envisioned by the 2013 City Council resolution. I pointed out that any new rules and regulations must prospective only. I noted that: many of the existing memorial gardens were created with the explicit or implicit permission of PARD; PARD has failed to publicize or enforce the existing rules and regulations for over three decades, effectively waiving and invalidating them; and that the long-established memorials (the memorial garden on my niece's grave has flourished for 14 years and the garden and stone border on my father’s grave, now expanded to include my mother’s, have been in place for eight years) cannot be removed without significantly damaging the gravesites. I also asserted that PARD implement the PCTF as set out in the City Of Austin Code, allowing family members to donate to a trust to maintain their loved ones’ final resting places. I noted that this could resolve any possible minimal maintenance costs resulting from memorial gardens and could provide additional source of income for the cemeteries. In fact, I stated, encouraging xeriscape memorial gardens and plantings with approved drought-hardy native and adaptive plants could both potentially reduce maintenance costs, such as mowing and watering, and greatly improve the appearance of the cemeteries. I stated that I would be more than willing to appear before the board to answer any questions regarding the history of this issue.
December 4, 2020, I received an email from Heidi Kahle, Policy Advisor for City Council Member Leslie Pool. She apologized for the delayed response, stating that the office has encountered an unusually high email volume in the past few weeks. She said that she was currently looking into your concerns with city staff, and would back to me as soon as she could can with information.
I replied the same day by email, thanking her for her reply. I told her that I have moved my blog regarding the cemetery process to a new platform and am currently working on updating the postings and information. I also noted that the day before I was at AMP taking new photographs of the general neglect of the cemetery for the blog and that conditions are even worse than the pictures I took over two years ago. I said that I am willing to hold off a week or so on publishing the blog until I hear back from the city or PARD, but after over seven years, this has gone on long enough. I told Kahle that I hoped that she could understand my, and the other stakeholders', anger and frustration regarding an issue that directly involves the final resting places of out loved ones.
December 10, 2020, I received an email from Segura. He stated that with regard to the cemetery rules, PARD is working with the Law Department to explore the possibility of codifying the 1978 Cemetery Rules into an ordinance that would, if approved by City Council, become part of the City Code. As part of that process, citizens would have the opportunity to provide input to Council regarding the proposed ordinance. He said that “responding to the many and varied legal issues related to the City of Austin is an immense undertaking” and that while “addressing the cemetery rules codification and the Perpetual Care Fund is important, the simple fact is that higher priorities have taken precedence.” Therefoe, Segura said that he cannot “provide an anticipated date of completion for either project.” He ended by thanking me for my “continued patience” and said that he will reach out to further communicate once he has have more information.
I respond the same day, copying McNeely, Kahle, and the PARD board. I remind Segura that it has been over seven years and we are not one iota closer to resolving these issues than we were on October 17, 2013. I noted that the PCTF is already set out in detail in the City of Austin Code; all PARD is required to do is implement it. I said that PARD has had at least 28 years to do so. and for at least 28 has been in blatant violation of both state and city law regarding this fund. I asked how much longer are the stakeholders and citizens of Austin required to be patient while PARD dithers and equivocates regarding the final resting places of their loved ones?
I reminded Segura that the October 17, 2013, City Council resolution required the City Manager, in collaboration with stakeholders and a working group of the Parks and Recreation Board, to evaluate whether current cemetery policies related to grave ornamentation were appropriately sensitive to personal and cultural expressions of grieving, while preserving necessary safety for cemetery workers and respect for the values of all families. I asserted that incorporating the 1978 Cemetery Rules, which PARD failed to publicize or enforce for over three decades, into the City Code is not in compliance with the resolution as well as a blatant violation of all we have allegedly been working for over more than seven years. I said that Segura was now openly admitting now that PARD has no intention of working with the stakeholders on this issue, and implicitly admitting that PARD never had any intention of doing so. I also stated that even if the 1978 rules were enacted into the Code, they could legally be prospective only, so would do nothing to address the current issues regarding memorial gardens and grave ornamentation. I ended by stating that Segura’s response is the typical bureaucratic meaningless pablum PARD has been trying to feed the stakeholders for more than seven years, is unacceptable, and is hurtful and insulting.
2022
July 20, 2022, I learn from a fellow stakeholder that PARD is preparing to make a presentation before the Parks and Recreation Board on July 25, 2022, requesting the Board's permission to seek to amend state law regarding PCTF so that PARD can dissolve PCTF and access the principle.
July 25, 2022, I appear at the Board meeting. Although I learned that this item had been pulled from the agenda, I was allowed to testify and distribute a binder to each member of the Board which included: a detailed timeline of my interactions with PARD with references to the Perpetual Care Trust Fund; testimony I gave before the Austin City Council regarding the PCTF; and an executive summary and detailed brief. In my testimony I explained that I had analyzed city fiscal reports regarding the PCTF from 1991 through 2016, and that during this period from 1991 through 2016, $2,216,255 of expenditures were made from the PCTF, but that there was no documentation showing that these expenditures were spent in accordance with city and state law. I explained that because of the short notice I had received, I had not had time to analyze the fiscal records for the years subsequent to 2016. I told the Board that if it approves of PARD’s proposal, I will be attend every hearing of the legislature regarding the proposal and that then will have had time to update my research, no doubt uncovering more data regarding PARD’s misuse of the PCTF.
August 8, 2022, I receive an email from Laura Cottam Sajbel, Chair of the Parks and Recreation Board, stating that after rescheduling the Finance Committee meeting to take up the matter of the PCTF for the following week, next week, PARD notified the Board that it had decided against pursuing the Perpetual Care Fund measure.
I responded that same day, thanking Cottam-Sajbel. for getting back to me. I told her that I had been prepared to appear before the Finance Committee with additional information, as I had w analyzed the city fiscal reports regarding the PCTF from 2017 through 2021. I discovered that there had been no expenditures from the PCTF since 2016; however, despite the fact that there has been $1,011,000 in the PCTF since 2015, there has been no reported revenue from 2016 through 2021. I explained that under both state and local law, thePCTF is supposed to be invested in "interest-bearing bonds or governmental securities.” Referring to the binder that I had presented to the Board on July 25, 2022, in each year from 1991 through 2015 (there was no clear information for 2001), there was reported revenue, for a total of $2,252,126. Most significantly, in 2015, there was a total of $1,011,000 in the fund and a reported revenue of $18,000. Yet ,despite the fact that the same identical amount has been reported in the fund from 2016 through 2021, the fund allegedly has not generated a penny of revenue. I stated that I did not find tis to be feasible. I noted that nothing in the fiscal reports sets forth where and how the PCTF is invested. AI also noted that oddly, since 2002 the reported revenue is in nice round numbers. I fund that certainly suggests that the accounting for this fund is extremely questionable.
I urged an immediate and thorough independent audit of PARD’s administration of the PCTF, including accounting for all revenues generated from 1991 through 2021, who authorized the expenditures of over $2 million from 1991 through 2016 and detailing what the monies were used for, how the PCTF has been invested, and why it has failed to generate any revenue since 2016. I also asserted thatPARD must be required to take immediate steps to implement the PCTF in an open and transparent manner pursuant to state and local law. I noted that I first became involved in the issues regarding the PCTF in 2017 when I tried to donate money for perpetual care of my parents’ gravesites and my own plot and my sister-in-law tried to do the same for her daughter's gravesite. I stated that if the PCTF was implemented in a trustworthy manner with proper accounting, I and my sister-in-law would be among the first to donate to it. Properly managed, the PCTF could be a continuous source of revenue to help maintain Austin cemeteries. I ended by stating that It is time for PARD to do what it should have done some 30 years ago, which is implement the PCTF as required by state law and the city code.
Cottam-Sajbel responded the same day that the Board and PARD need to look into the apparent lack of interest on the fund, which she agreed was significant.
August 11, 2022, Cottam-Sajbel contacted me via email informing me that the Finance Committee was unable to make a quorum for its August 15, 2022, meeting, but that the Committee would be examining issues regarding the of funding for cemeteries and the proper use of the funds in at its September meeting. She told me that Mr. Patrick Moore will the new Committee chair.
I respond the same day thanking her for keeping me up to date on this issue. I state that have done a lot of research regarding the PCTF and would be willing to assist or serve on any working group or committee regarding the PCTF, as well as testifying before the Committee if requested.
August 12, 2022, Cottam-Sajbel responds that she will forward this information to Moore.
September 7, 2022, in an e-mail PARD states that it is presenting the updated draft of proposed Cemetery Rules and Regulations for community review and feedback. Community members are invited to review and provide comments from September 7 through October 9 online. In addition, PARD will host a virtual community meeting on October 5 to review aspects of the draft rules and provide an opportunity for community questions and comments during the virtual setting. The next day PARD sent out second e-mail stating that it had "failed to recognize that the originally scheduled virtual meeting date falls during Yom Kippur. To avoid disrupting the observance of Yom Kippur, the meeting has been moved to October 10. The online comments will also be extended through October 10." No notice or sign is posted at Austin Memorial Park and I assume at no other cemetery.
October 10, 2022, PARD holds a virtual community meeting via ZOOM regarding the new cemetery rules.
2023
January 12, 2023, PARD posts notice of proposed Rule161-23.03.
February 8, 2023, I file extensive comments regarding the proposed rule. As set forth in these comments, PARD failed to comply with the procedures for rules adoption set out in the City Code as the posted notice does not indicate “changes from the current text” as required by the rules. In these comments I also point out that: the proposed rules fail to address the current widespread neglect and mismanagement of the cemeteries and will in fact exacerbate the current poor conditions; PARD’s claim that it must have unchecked authority to remove any gravesite ornamentation or plantings in order to maintain the cemeteries has no support in fact; neither the City of Austin nor PARD has the legal authority to impose new rules or regulations regarding existing grave site memorials and gardens and any proposed rules must apply only prospectively; PARD has repeatedly failed to properly notify the public and hold open public meetings; PARD has refused to implement the City of Austin Perpetual Care Trust Fund (PCTF) in accordance with Texas law and blatantly violated state and local law by illegally expending over two million dollars from the fund; nothing in the rules requires PARD to publicize these rules or make them available to persons purchasing plots in the Austin cemeteries; the rules give Cemetery Operations sole discretion to allow tours and public events in the cemeteries without any limits or guidelines regarding what sorts of tours, photography, or filming is permitted; the rules do not require PARD to properly maintain the city cemeteries as required under under state law; the rules give PARD the unlimited right to disinter and move any grave, even to another cemetery and without any notice to the family, if PARD makes an error in interment or conveyance of property; the rules make the owner of a space solely responsible for cleaning and repairing memorials and mausoleums, despite the fact that this is PARD's responsibility under state law and impose additional fees on the owner; the rules fail to address what happens to damaged or fallen headstones if PARD is unable to trace the owner; the rules give PARD unchecked power and sole discretion to remove and dispose of any item from any gravesite without any notice to the family and regardless of how long these items have been in place or their historical or monetary value; the rules do not require PARD to repair or restore any damage to a gravesite resulting from PARD's removal of grave ornamentation and in fact indemnify it from the theft or vandalism of ornamentation, decoration, or any other personal property in a cemetery; and, the proposed rules could violate federal law barring religious and ethnic discrimination. I requested: a restart to the flawed and unfair rules and regulations process; that the process be open to all the citizens of Austin and that there must be multiple in-person meetings held throughout the city to ensure that all of the public has an opportunity to attend; that public input must be sincerely considered and incorporated in any new rules or regulations; that any rules and regulations must be prospective only; that the recommendations of the 2015 City of Austin Historic Cemeteries Master Plan regarding the use of heavy equipment around gravesites, the planting of native and adaptive turf and plants, and encouraging the establishment of ground covers within curbed or walled family plots be incorporated in any proposed rules and regulations; that the proposed rules and regulations allow the continuing exercise of religious and ethnic practices in the cemeteries; that the PCTF be implemented by PARD in accordance with state and city law, including transparent accounting of funds and the expenditure of any revenues; and that there be an intensive independent audit of the administration of the PCTF regarding all transactions, revenue, and expenditures since 1992.
March 23, 2023, according to the text of proposed Rule161-23.03, if a separate notice of rule adoption is not posted on or before March 23, 2023, the rule is automatically withdrawn and cannot be adopted without first posting a new notice of a proposed rule. I have never received, or been able to discover, any posted notice of rule adoption. Further, nothing in the minutes of the Parks and Recreation Board show any discussion or adoption of the proposed rule prior to this deadline.
April 13, 2023, my brother Steven Weintraub sent me an email that he had received a call from Jason Walker from Austin Cemetery Operations. According to my brother, Walker stated that the mayor's office had directed him to call and that our three graves will be put on an owner's maintenance list. Walker explained that the city will no longer maintain our family gravesites, but will mark them as owner maintenance. Walker told my brother that he had been through the cemetery in the last few days and said what we have is currently in compliance.
I responded to Steven that unless we have something in writing, everything can change, especially if a new regime takes control. I also stated that I have never heard of an “owner’s maintenance list” throughout this nearly decade ordeal and wondered whether this is a new policy and how it will be publicized and implemented. I further replied that this still does not address issues like the proposed cemetery rules and where they currently stand, the Cemetery Division’s current wholesale looting and desecration of gravesites, or the overall neglect and poor maintenance of the cemeteries. I also stated that I wanted to see the Perpetual Care Trust Fund finally implemented and transparently operated, or otherwise, PARD will just wait for us “owners” all to die so that they can dance on our graves (or, in their case, run heavy equipment over them). I suggested requesting a face-to-face with Walker and getting some sort of written agreement/process regarding this owner's maintenance list. However, coordinating our schedules was not easy and the request kept getting put off.
July 27, 2023, I visit AMP to water the gravesites and prune the gardens in preparation to leaving town for a week-long trip on July 28, 2023. I return on August 4, 2023, but had contracted Covid-19 and was too ill to visit AMP. I test negative for Covid-19 on August 9, 2023.
August 10, 2023, I receive a text message from Tina Huckabee that she had visited AMP that morning and that the long-established memorial gardens on our parents' and her daughter's gravesites had been uttering destroyed, apparently by someone using a string trimmer (weed eater).
I went to AMP to look at the damage myself. Afterwards, I go to the AMP office and demand to know who authorized the destruction of the gardens and when. No one could provide me with any paperwork. PARD employee Jorge MartÃnez accompanied me back to the ruined gardens and took some pictures with his phone, but denied any knowledge of what happened. He said that he would pass my complaint on to Jason Walker.
August 11, 2023, Steven Weintraub tells me that he received a call from Jason Walker apologizing for the destruction of the gardens, telling Steven that it was in error and stating that PARD would pay to replace the plants. We do not know who authorized the destruction of the gardens, when, and why.
I subsequently met with Walker, who apologized profusely, stating it had been an error on the part of the maintenance crew and promising that PARD would pay for new plants. I gave Walker a link to this blog so that he could learn what I, my family, and other stakeholders have suffered at the hands of PARD over the past decade.
August 14, 2023, I submit a public information request to the City of Austin for “Any and all records, including, but not limited, to memorandum, work orders, phone messages, or notes, regarding any and all landscaping work orders and requests, including, but not limited, to general maintenance, mowing, planting, plant removal, and use of string trimmers (aka weed eaters or whackers), at Austin Memorial Park from July 27, 2023, through August 10, 2023. Include: the location(s) affected in any way by said order or request; the name(s) and title(s) of the person(s) making, seeking, or authorizing said order or request; the date(s) of said orders or requests; the name(s) and title(s) of person(s) carrying out said order or request; and, the date(s) said order or request was completed.”
August 18, 2023, I receive a response to my August 14, 2023, public information request stating that the City of Austin has no responsive documents to my request and no responsive information for the time frame requested.
September 6, 2023, I emailed Walker that I had not heard back from him and do not know whether he had read my blog. I noted that he had told me that he had previously worked at the Texas State Cemetery and therefore should understand the importance of maintaining a historic cemetery, including preserving established grave ornamentation, as well as detailed record keeping. However, I stated, as documented on this blog, PARD is currently is currently stripping gravesites of ornamentation throughout Austin’s historical cemeteries with no written policies or procedures, no documentation, and no consideration of the ornaments’ emotional, historical, and monetary value (Tomb Raiders, Napolepard on the March, Tomb Raiders Ramage On). I also noted that PARD has admitted that wants to rip out gravesite gardens and ornaments simply so that it can run heavy equipment over graves, regardless of the damage it causes to graves and headstones.
In that email, I also included pictures of the gardens on my family gravesites before PARD destroyed them. I also expressed concern regarding is what happens to those gardens when I and my brother and sister-in-law pass away (and are in fact buried at AMP). I explained that is one reason why I am so adamant that the Austin Perpetual Care Trust Fund finally be implemented (it has been some 30 years since the fund was enacted by the City of Austin).
I finally asked what, if any, plans, PARD has for resetting the many tilting and tumbled headstones throughout AMP and other public cemeteries. I noted that over the years I have visited AMP, I have seen the problem continuously worsen and that dishonors those who are buried there and is a disgrace for the City of Austin.
September 6, 2023, Walker responded by email, thanking me for my email. He said that he had been able to look over and read most of the blog postings and would continue to look over and study them. Walker stated that he looked forward to continuing discussions with me.
September 26, 2023, I emailed Walker explaining that I have been waiting to get back to him to see whether any of the garden on my parents’ gravesite has survived. To date, I stated, it appeared that at least two of the day lilies were re-sprouting, and at least one Engelmann daisy and one four-nerve daisy may had also survived. I noted that although I had been watering the gravesite regularly, with the recent rains and slightly cooler weather, it was possible that more plants may appear. I told Walker would like to give the garden another week or two to recover, then I and my brother would like to meet with him to discuss not only the restoration and maintenance of our family’s gravesites, but also PARD’s future plans for AMP.
December 8, 2023, I visited AMP with some gardening equipment, having decided that the surviving plants were tall and established enough that I could weed and prepare the soil for mulching. However, upon arriving at my parents' graves, I discovered that the memorial garden on my parents' graves had been once again desecrated, completely shredded by a weed-eater and the still-green ruined foliage left scattered on my parents' headstones and over their gravesites.
No comments:
Post a Comment