Committee digging into proposed changes to burial site laws

Listen to this article

A committee looking into possible changes to state laws that protect burial sites is putting the final touches on legislation that might be introduced next session.

The Legislative Council Committee on the Preservation of Burial Sites was formed after Republicans proposed law changes last session that would have let quarry owners excavate sites that might be American Indian burial mounds. At a meeting on Thursday — expected to be the committee’s last — members spent hours going painstakingly, line-by-line through draft proposals.

The proposals called for limiting the Wisconsin Historical Society director’s discretion to decide what burials sites should be catalogued. The historical society estimates there are 9,700 burial sites in the state. Of those, 1,400 have been catalogued, meaning their existence has been recorded by the Wisconsin Historical Society.

The proposals also call for establishing a process that could be used to contest a decision by the historical society either to record a burial site or to later reverse such a decision.

Committee members butted heads over whether certain provisions would afford enough protection to landowners who might have burial sites on their properties.

Justin Oeth, a committee member and lawyer at Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren, argued several times that current law does not go far enough to protect landowners’ rights.

“It’s my opinion that in order for the director to catalog the site, 1) they get the owner’s consent and 2) if they don’t get the owner’s consent, I’d like to see a burden on the director at that stage to show that there are remains in the site,” he said. “If you’re taking property from owners, I think there should be a burden on the director to show that there are remains.”

Oeth said landowners should be given an opportunity to test a site to learn if it contains human remains. Their findings, he said, should then be allowed to be presented as evidence.

Bob Shea, a committee member and president of Madison-based Wingra Stone Co. and Wingra Redi-Mix, agreed. Shea is now embroiled in a lawsuit with the historical society over what is believed to be a burial site on a private landowner’s property. One of his chief frustrations, he said, is that he is not allowed under current law to test the site.

“Somewhere along the line in this process we have to answer the question: whether or not we truly have human remains at a site,” he said.

David Grignon, a committee member and director of the Historic Preservation Department of the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, disagreed.

“This would be desecration of burial sites,” he said. “No invasive action should be done. We discussed this at a previous meeting and we agreed testing should not be done.”

Committee vice chair Rob Brooks, R-Saukville, said he agreed with Oeth that the proposals don’t go far enough but they do provide ways for landowners to appeal decisions they disagree with.

“Maybe it doesn’t go as far as we like, but we think it’s a good process,” he said. Follow @erikastrebel