Our first reaction upon learning that the city of Ashland was considering assuming operation of the Ashland Cemetery was: Why? City government has no obligation to operate a cemetery. Why would it want to assume that additional responsibility?
However, when one considers the options available to the board of the non-profit entity that has owned and operated the Ashland Cemetery for generations, having the city assume operation of the cemetery is the best alternative for assuring the preservation of the beautiful, historic burial grounds that was incorporated at the time of the Civil War but has graves dating back to the Revolutionary War era.
For many years, the cemetery has been operated by a non-profit agency that has received income from selling gravesites and from interest generated by a perpetual care trust fund.
Just like many other endowments, the trust fund that was established to assure the perpetual care of the 106-acre cemetery off Belmont Street has seen its assets dwindle as a result of the nationwide recession. Largely because of that and a decline in other revenue, Richard “Sonny” Martin, board chairman and attorney for the cemetery, said the non-profit entity that owns and operates the cemetery cannot continue to do so.
“Continuing to operate it is not a possibility,” said Martin of the cemetery board.
That leaves two options. One is to sell the cemetery, which includes the graves of many of this community’s founding families. Several area cemeteries already are owned and operated as privately owned businesses, and we have little doubt that a buyer could be found for the Ashland Cemetery.
But Martin and cemetery board member and local funeral director Marshall Steen told the Ashland Board of City Commissioners that having a private, for-profit company purchase and operate the historic cemetery is not the best option.
Martin, who is also the city’s long-time corporation counsel, said the cemetery board believes the city would be better able to maintain the historic cemetery and ensure it remains a protected asset than a private company would.
“We just feel like this is a very important issue; it’s a very important asset that our community has,” said Steen. “We are trying to do what we feel like is the best way to maintain and preserve what we have. This is the best scenario we have come up with.”
We agree with Martin and Steen.
The cemetery would not be a drain on city taxes. In fact, Ashland Finance Director Tony Grubb has estimated the city could earn a profit of $42,000 during the next fiscal year based on analysis of three years of the cemetery’s financial statements.
The facility has approximately $230,000 in debts. But if the city takes over, officials will be able to use the roughly $220,000 in the trust fund to help pay off the debt. The remaining debt and a $5,000 prepayment penalty would be paid by the city.
While it is possible that the cemetery could prove profitable and actually boost the city’s income, earning a profit should not be the city’s main concern. In fact, we would prefer to see that any “profits” from the cemetery’s operation are designated exclusively for improvements to the burial grounds.
The only interest the city should have in operating the cemetery is to preserve and operate it as the asset it is. Using revenue produced by the cemetery to fund general fund programs could make the city dependent on the cemetery earning a profit for the operation of city programs unrelated to the cemetery.
While we support the idea of the city assuming operation of the Ashland Cemetery, the devil, as they say, is in the details. While many details need to be worked out before the transfer of the cemetery to the city can be completed, at least initially it looks like a good deal for all concerned.
