Folsom City Council
May 10, 2022

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Josh Kinkade
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

FYI
KellyMullett
Acln itislr otirre Assi.sfcn f
Community Development Department
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
O: 916.461.6231
F:916.355.7274
Kelly Mullett
Tuesday, July 20, 2021 9:27 AM
Josh Kinkade
FW: Proposed Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium
ffi gFI ? €F r{}Lg$xfi
Og@ www.fotsom.ca.us
From: nicole higgins
Sent: Tuesday, July 20,20219:23 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Mike Kozlowskl <[email protected]>; Sarah Aquino <[email protected]>; YK Chala mcherla <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Rosario Rodriguez <[email protected]>; Elaine Andersen <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Kelly Mullett <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Proposed Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To whom it may concern,
These are letters from my children regarding their concerns for the proposed crematorium:

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Thank you,
Evelyn Gates (7yrs)and
Jackson Gates (9yrs)
Sent from my iPhone
5

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
pleosu }rscp h,t oif clenn
li
\
!
.l -
*
:

F
t t1
',i,JL,
,'i IAI''
i 'l , I ,, r
tr | 'r' i L,' .'
I
I
I
I
1 I
I
\
It
,{:n,,?i.; I.,r .t
,t) n3 wa circtf Epenn .i
T" hn''l 'ftiu"ri4' F{.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

January 11,2022
Josh Kinkadeo Associate Planner
City of Folsom
Community Development Department
RE Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium CUP and IS/IVIND
Planning No. P-19-182
Words matter....and calling a crematorium 'safe' is misleading. Peter Hartwick of Peter Hartwick Combustion Technologies claims their crematoriums use less fuel, lower Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions, and are compliant with NFPA and air quality standards. "Low NOx emissions"? Any NOx molecules during exposure to UV rays in sunlight and heat, interact with volatile organic compounds and form a serious ground level pollutant....and in the presence of rain...acid rain. There is strong evidence that NOx respiratory exposure can trigger and exacerbate existing asthma symptoms, and can even lead to the development of asthma over a longer period of time. These toxins can irritate the lungs of healthy people! And what about those with existing medical conditions such as asthma or heart disease?
In a study by the EPA, from only one crematory in Southern Califomia, they found Carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, Particulate Matter (PMl0), (PM2.5), mercury and other heavy metals like cadmium, lead, and nickel. Known carcinogens like dioxins and furans and even hydrogen chloride. Mercury is colorless and odorless, and there is no agreement about the safe level of it. Some say no level is safe. Mercury can be present in dental fillings (mostly from baby-boomer days) and medical devices of bodies that are cremated and is most dangerous when heated. Crematories are required to remove these things beforehand, but the materials become biohazard waste and so most won't bother.

Who would know?
Without information of how often a crematory is working, how does one say it "meets air quality standards". Igor Semenyuk, Chief Operations Officer of Miller Funeral Home (which also owns and operates Lakeside Memorial Lawn) says they may be cremating 2-3 per day, and then claims 7 a week. Which is it? I noticed in his addendum to the proposal he has already increased the daily rate from 400 lbs to 800 lbs a day of human remains. Does that mean more per day? As the demand for cremations increase, so will the need for more working days. Once in operation, whose to know? Who regulates that? NO one!
Because of a successful lobbying effort to declassiff crematories as solid waste incinerators, the EPA does not regulate solid-waste incinerators category pertaining to the funeral industry. States that regulate air quality standards don't require testing for specific toxins that are released during cremation. I understand that the California Air Resources does an annual inspection, but what and how do they test? What about the 364 days in between?

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Additionally, besides air health, propane will be used at this proposed site in Folsom, meaning more truck traffic through our neighborhoods and although NFPA compliant, crematories aren't required to report workplace accidents to OSHA. So a mishap occurs and nothing has to be reported, unless of course it is catastrophic...then we would all Know! THIS IS AN OPEN SPACE AND RESIDENTIAL AREA...WHAT A CATASTROPHE IT WOULD BE!
The Preserve Neighborhood has about I I I households sharing the neighborhood with the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery. Can anyone really say there are SAFE levels of toxic chemicals?
Crematories are definitely a necessity but why would they be allowed in an environmentally sensitive open space area with vegetation, historical structures and next to a fresh body of water (Lake Natoma). A designated industrial business district away from a fully occupied community of families, schools, and animals could be considered.

Please don't approve profits over human lives! I ask that you take these health issues seriously to pieserve ih" Pt"t"*e Neighborhood and historic Folsom.

The crematorium in our neighborhood will affect all of us in the Preserve Neighborhood, and it should be treated as aHAZARDOUS PROPOSITION to this urban historical area of Folsom.

Pam Ceccarelli,
lFong St.

CA

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

RE
January 17,2022
Folsom Cify Officials
Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium CUP and IS/IVIND
Planning No. P-19-182
Words matter....and calling a crematorium 'safe' is misleading. Peter Hartwick of Peter Hartwick Combustion Technologies claims their crematoriums use less fuel, lower Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions, and arc compliant with NFPA and air quality standards. "Low NOx emissions"? Any NOx molecules during exposure to UV rays in sunlight and heat, interact with volatile organic compounds and form a serious ground level pollutant....and in the presence of rain...acid rain. There is strong evidence that NOx respiratory exposure can trigger and exacerbate existing asthma symptoms, and can even lead to the development of asthma over a longer period of time. These toxins can iritate the lungs of healthy people! And what about those with existing medical conditions such as asthma or heart disease?
In a study by the EPA, from only one crematory in Southern California, they found Carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, Particulate Matter (PMl0), (PM2.5), mercury and other heavy metals like cadmium, lead, and nickel. Known carcinogens like dioxins and furans and even hydrogen chloride. Mercury is colorless and odorless, and there is no agreement about the safe level of it. Some say no level is safe. Mercury can be present in dental fillings (mostly from baby-boomer days) and medical devices of bodies that are cremated and is most dangerous when heated. Crematories are required to remove these things beforehand, but the materials become biohazard waste and so most won't bother.

Who would know?
Without information of how often a crematory is working, how does one say it "meets air quality standards". Igor Semenyuk, Chief Operations Officer of Miller Funeral Home (which also owns and operates Lakeside Memorial Lawn) says they may be cremating 2-3 per day, and then claims 7 a week. Which is it? I noticed in his addendum to the proposal he has already increased the daily rate from 400 lbs to 800 lbs a day of human remains. Does that mean more per day? As the demand for cremations increase, so will the need for more working days. Once in operation, whose to know? Who regulates that? NO one!
Because of a successful lobbying effort to declassiff crematories as solid waste incinerators, the EPA does not regulate solid-waste incinerators category pertaining to the funeral industry. States that regulate air quality standards don't require testing for specific toxins that are released during cremation. I understand that the California Air Resources does an annual inspection, but what and how do they test? What about the 364 days in between?

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Additionally, besides air health, propane will be used at this proposed site in Folsom, meaning more truck traffic through our neighborhoods and although NFPA compliant, crematories aren't required to report workplace accidents to OSHA. So a mishap occurs and nothing has to be reported, unless of course it is catastrophic...then we would all Know! THIS IS AN OPEN SPACE AND RESIDENTIAL AREA...WHAT A CATASTROPHE IT WOULD BE!
The Preserve Neighborhood has about 111 households sharing the neighborhood with the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery. Can anyone really say there are SAFE levels of toxic chemicals?
Crematories are definitely a necessity but wh)'would they be allowed in an environmentall:t sensitive open space area with veeetation. historical structures and next to a fresh body of water (Lake Natoma). A designated industrial business district away from a fully occupied community of families, schools, and animals could be considered.

Please don't approve profits over human lives! I ask that you take these health issues seriously to preserve the Preserve Neighborhood, wildlife, and historic Folsom.

The crematorium in our neighborhood will affect all of us in the Preserve Neighborhood, and it should be treated as aHAZARDOUS PROPOSITION to this urban historical area of Folsom.

Pam Ceccarelli,
lFong St.

Folsom, CA

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

July 7,2021
Kelly Mullett,
Words matter....and calling a crematorium 'safe' is misleading. Peter Hartwick of Peter Hartwick Combustion Technologies claims their crematoriums use less fuel, lower Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions, and are compliant with NFPA and air quality standards. "Low NOx emissions"? Any NOx molecules during exposure to UV rays in sunlight and heat, interact with volatile organic compounds and form a serious ground level pollutant....and in the presence of rain...acid rain. These toxins can enter the lungs, and even short term exposure can irritate the lungs of healthy people! And what about those with medical conditions such as asthma or heart disease? Because of a successful lobbying effort to declassiff crematories as solid waste incinerators, the EPA does not regulate solid-waste incinerators category pertaining to the funeral industry. States that regulate air quality standards don't require testing for specific toxins that are released during cremation. If there are inspections by the California Air Resources, how often is it performed and how is it tested? In a study by the EPA, from only one crematory in Southern California, they found Carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, Particulate Matter (PM10), (PM2.5), mercury and other heavy metals like cadmium, lead, and nickel. Known carcinogens like dioxins and furans and even hydrogen chloride. Mercury is colorless and odorless, and there is no agreement about the safe level of it. Some say no level is safe. Mercury can be present in dental fillings (mostly from baby-boomer days) and medical devices of bodies that are cremated and is most dangerous when heated. Crematories should remove these things beforehand, but the materials become biohazard waste and so most won't bother. Who would know?
Without information of how often a crematory is working, how does one say it "meets air quality standards". Igor Semenyuk, Chief Operations Officer of Miller Funeral Home (which also owns and operates Lakeside Memorial Lawn) says they may be cremating 2-3 per day, and then says 7 a week. Which is it? As the demand for cremations increase, so will the need for more working days. Once in operation, whose to know? Who regulates that? NO one!
Additionally, besides air health, propane will be used at this proposed site in Folsom, meaning more truck traffic through our neighborhoods and although NFPA compliant, crematories aren't required to report workplace accidents to OSHA. So a mishap occurs and nothing has to be reported, unless of course it is catastrophic...then we would all know!
I don't have a problem with crematories, but like an airport, it should be in a designated business district away from a fully occupied community of families, schools, and animals. The Preserve Neighborhood has about I I I households sharing the

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
neighborhood with the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery. We feel there is no such thing as a safe level of a toxic chemical.

The crematorium in our neighborhood will affect all of us in the Preserve Neighborhood, and I think it should be treated as a hazardous proposition to this urban area of Folsom.

Please don't approve profits over human lives! I ask that you take these health issues seriously to preserve the Preserve Neighborhood.

Pam Ceccarelli,'
lnong st.

Folsom, CA el6I

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

February I, ,2022
To: The Historic District Commissioners
Chairman Kathleen Cole, Vice Chairman Mickey Ankhelyi, Commissioners, Mark Dascallos, John Felts, John Lane, Justin Raithel and Daniel West
Josh Kinkade
Pam Johns
Elaine Andersen
Folsom City Council Members:

Mayor Kerri Howell, Vice Mayor Rosario Rodriguez, Council Members, Sarah Aquino, YK Chalamcherla, and Mike Kozlowski
I am writing in response to public comments on the application for a Crematorium to be installed at the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery in Historic Folsom. While the Helix report focuses on the Environmental scope, our neighbors hope you will see the human impacts and aspects of this proposal. ln his scope of Work- lnstalling a Crematory document, Mr. Semenyuk, the applicant, stated that Caring Services Group has eight Mortuaries and four Crematoriums. Allfour crematories are located inside the funeral homes per Mr. Semenyuk. Yet in historic Folsom , he is asking to operate a crematorium in a metal shed fueled by above ground propane tanks. I am surprised that The City of Folsom does not not have standards that would prohibit such an unrefined concept, I also find it distasteful that remains would be stored in a cooler in the shed.

Aesthetics: Both sheds are visible from Natoma Street and Forrest Street even without the roof exhaust stack installed. People visiting their deceased loved ones situated behind the shed also can see the crematorium. This is not peaceful nor esthetically pleasant..l feel the initial study and mitigated negative declaration minimizes and/or fails to recognize the negative effects on very many people. The Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery is designated as a historic cemetery. lt is old, well landscaped and is a peaceful and interesting place to visit. The Chung Wah Chinese Historical Cemetery, very close by, is listed on the National Historic Register. The California State Dredger Tailings Preserve, located next to the sheds, is in itself historic and unique. These sites should not be altered by installing a crematorium .

The current open space zoning is appropriate for this site and I ask you to not change it in order to operate a crematorium. Our city has a lovely historic district, I ask you to protect it's historic features as well as protecting the people living in the surrounding area.

Parking impact. Project objectives: Provide cremation services for members of the population whose customs or religion require such practices. As I understand it, the cemetery has about 50 parking spaces. lf there are large groups witnessing cremations, overflow parking on Forrest Street would be a problem due to the width of the street. Two lanes down to one narrow lane. I spoke to an employee at a nearby mortuary and crematorium and asked about how many people witness cremations ? His answer was anywhere from five to two hundred at a time. lf his estimate is true, the current parking spaces are not adequate. Also, traffic flow is problematic at this location with light rail blocking the intersection frequently. No other exit is available. The additional parking will affect the quality of life of the residents who all use Forrest St. to access the intersection on Folsom Blvd. ( intensity impact) Fire impact: This devastating impact has been minimized. The City of Folsom Community Wildfire Protection Plan clearly outlines the fire danger in this area. The city also declared a Fire danger emergency last year. lt concerns me that this much propane will be in constant use at high

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
-2-
temperatures so close to a populated area and major roadway. This area would not be easy to evacuate in an emergency. I would encourage you to read the wildfire report if you are not familiar with it Why would the city agree to place 500 pounds of propane that would be used at high temperatures, five days a week, for 90 minutes to 2 hours for each cremation in a complicated environment that effects so many people? I noticed in the section on geology and soils, the mention of seismic activity.

Cl. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off site landslide , lateral spreading subsidencg liquefaction or
collapse. Another reason above ground propane is very concerning at this location.

There needs to be an emergency evacuation plan in existence for the neighborhood. An illegal fire at the Lake would prove difficult to access for fire engines and a fire could spread quickly endangering hornes and the propane tank. While an argument might be made that there are many large propane tanks in use in the city, I would say, they are not burning at high temperatures at a constant rate. The crematory would use 9,835.9 gallons of propane a year.

Air Quality is very concerning for people like myself with respiratory problems. Spare the air days affect my asthma and I need to stay indoors. The proposed crematorium location close to residences and recreation can certainly effect our quality of life. The report refers to The Preserve/ lake Natoma Shores neighborhood as small, however there are 118 homes here. lt also lists the distance to all the nearby schools but does not seem to be concerned with the exposure of the children who live here.

I wish I were more versed on CEQA, but lfeel that people more qualified than myself can address those concerns as wellas cultural resources and air quality.

I have some observations regarding the lnitial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration dated Jan. 2022.

Future growth of the city of Folsom: Project objectives: prepare for an increase in the demand for cremation services as cremations become more popular in California and as Folsom's population grows.

This concerns me. The report examines what the needs would be at 500 cremations per year. Whafs to say the need doubles as do the impacts. Because of the problems noted in my letter regarding the impacts on the neighborhood, I ask you to look ahead and consider this as you make your decision.

cleaned however,l don't see any mention of maintenance procedures. Since no sewer line is being planned, what happens to residue, dust etc?
0n the Section of the History of Lakeside Memorial [awn, it states not much information in academic or grey literature exists on the history of the Lakeside Lawn Memorial. ln 2W2-2AA} Mr. Claney of Millers Mortuary applied for a conditional use permit to operate a Crematorium at the Lakeside Cemetery. Sue Silver wrote a comprehensive research paper describing the historic graves and hlstory of the cemetery which is included in the, then ci{s staff report. . Her report is very interesting to read and I hope you will have a chance to read it. Not long afterward, the cemetery was designated historic. The prior application was denied before the designation.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
-3-
Chinese lnfluence on Folsom. I would have liked to see rnore emphasis on the Chung Wah Historic Cemeterythat is located so close to Lakeside Memorial [awn. lt is on the National Historic Register, California Sate Registered Landmark and the City of Folsom's resource inventory. A place of this significance deserves more than a mention.

Section: 7.0. Environmental Factot's Potentially Affected. ltems not checked: Aesthetics, Biological, Recreation and Wildfire. I feel they are affected.

Energy: Under lighting: I did not see the large light installed on the adjacent shed mentioned as a new source of light.

Conflicting information: evaluation of transportation: ( b). No impact: the proposed action would not be a destination accessible for members of the public and would only be visited by a SMALL NUMBER of WORKERS durlng construction and operation. The project would not result in signiffcant increase in vehicle miles traveled, and is located within one half mile of a major public transit stop which provides both bus and light rail service. No impact will occur.

Mr. Semenyuh There are several large cultural communities residing and moving to Folsom.

Regretfully, we do not have the ability nor the capability to serve the Sikh, Hindu, Buddhist or other cremation based cultures as they require an on site crematory so that they can exercise their funeral rights and customs. ( witness cremation)
Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Pat Binley
Isutterst.

Folsom, Ca. 95630

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
tt --*Z- -?: ,7- z-u;2 1
Dear Historic District Chairman Bracht and Commissioners, West, Ankhelyi, Cole, Duewel, Dascallos and Felts,
I am writing concerning the application for a crematorium at the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery. The cemetery is located in the Historic District of Folsom and is zoned Open Space/Conservation. This is a unique area because of the Three Historical entities located there. The Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery is designated a Historic Cemetery. To the rear boundary of the cemetery is the Historic Chung Wah Chinese cemetery which is listed on the National Historic Register. And very close to the proposed Crematory metal shed site is the California State Dredger Tailings Preserve. This is probably the only site in our state that combines these aspects of our heritage in one small area. I believe the addition of a crematorium will change the character of the cemetery.

Besides the above Historical aspects, the cemetery is located close to the American River Bike trail, Lake Natoma and the residential neighborhood where I reside. A crematorium will affect many people who enjoy recreation on the trail and the lake, not just a few people.

I am concerned about Fire Danger. The proposal includes the installation of two 250 gallon above ground propane tanks. This area is located in a wildfire danger area. ln fact, the City of Folsom recently declared a local emergency due to fire danger. lf there were a wildfire or vandalism the propane is a dangerous threat.

I am also concerned about Emergency Evacuation . Access to the bike trail and Lake Natoma is difficult for fire trucks to maneuver. Our neighborhood, in which the cemetery entrance is located, has only one entrance and the same egress, This is compounded by light railtrain interruptions blocking the Folsom Blvd.-Forrest St. intersection four times every hour. Emergency evacuation could be a big problem for occupant of over 100 plus homes.

We have been researching the effects of air quality from the smoke released into the air from crematoriums and have learned that cumulative effects are harmful to unborn children, developing children, elderly and those with existing health conditions like mvself. Page 1028
05/10/2022 Item No.18.
lf the crematorium is allowed, I wonder how anyone can know how many people are cremated daily and the actual condition of the air guality. The air quality report is based on two cremations per day, 5 day a week. Air quality is monitored once a year.

While there are other crematoriums not far away from Folsom, I am not against a crematorium in our city. I would hope it would be in an industrial surrounding zoned for this type of business operation, not in an area where people live, bike ride, wal( run, canoe, kayak, paddle board, fish and swim. The Sacramento State Aquatic team practices rowing on the lake and there are many bird nesting sites and animals to protect such as our bald eagles. I urge you to deny a conditional use permit and protect the citizens affected by this proposal. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Pat Binley
12Og Sutter St. Folsom, Ca

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
? - ,l'- Z,--L, :l* )
Dear Historic District Chairman Bracht and Commissioners, West, Ankhelyi, Cole, Duewel, Dascallos and Felts t
I am writing concerning the application for a crematorium at the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery. The cemetery is located in the Historic District of Folsom and is zoned Open Space/Conservation. This is a unique area because of the Three Historical entities located there. The Lakeside Memorial Lawn Cemetery is designated a Historic Cemetery. To the rear boundary of the cemetery is the Historic Chung Wah Chinese cemetery which is listed on the National Historic Register. And very close to the proposed Crematory metal shed site is the California State Dredger Tailings Preserve. This is probably the only site in our state that combines these aspects of our heritage in one small area. I believe the addition of a crematorium will change the character of the cemetery.

Besides the above Historical aspects, the cemetery is located close to the American River Bike trail, Lake Natoma and the residential neighborhood where I reside. A crematorium will affect many people who enjoy recreation on the trail and the lake, notiust a few people.

I am concerned about Fire Danger. The proposal includes the installation of two 250 gallon above ground propane tanks. This area is located in a wiHfire danger area. ln fact, the City of Folsorn recently declared a local emergency due to fire danger. lf there were a wildfire or vandalism the propane is a dangerous threat.

I am also concerned about Emergency Evacuation . Access to the bike trail and Lake Natoma is difficult for fire trucks to maneuver. Our neighborhood, in which the cemetery entrance is located, has only one entrance and the same egress. This is compounded by light railtrain interruptions blocking the Folsom Blvd.-Forrest St. intersection four times every hour. Emergency evacuation could be a big problem for occupant of over 100 plus homes.

We have been researching the effects of air quality from the smoke released into the air from crematoriums and have learned that cumulative effects are harmful to unborn children, developing children, elderly and those with existing health conditions like mvself. Page 1030
05/10/2022 Item No.18.
lf the crematorium is allowed, I wonder how anyone can know how many people are cremated daily and the actual condition of the air guality. The air quality report is based on two cremations per day, 5 day a week. Air quality is monitored once a year.

While there are other crematoriums not far away from Folsom, t am not against a crematorium in our city. I would hope it would be in an industrial surrounding zoned for this type of business operation, not in an area where people live, bike ride, walk, run, canoe, kayak, paddle board, fish and swim. The Sacramento State Aquatic team practices rowing on the lake and there are many bird nesting sites and animals to protect such as our bald eagles. I urge you to deny a conditional use permit and protect the citizens affected by this proposal. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Pat Binley
lsutter St. Folsom, Ca

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Josh Kinkade
From:

Sent:
lo:

Subject:

Daron Bracht <[email protected]>
Tuesday, March 2, 2021 11:13 AM
Josh Kinkade; Steven Banks
Fwd: Crematorium at Lakeside Cemetary
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:Crematorium at Lakeside Cemetary
Date:Mon, 21 Dec 2O2O 17:25:21 -0800
From:Patricia Bin
To:daronbr@ pacbell. net
CC:Patricia Binle
To: Daron Bracht
Chairman Fofsom Historic District Commission
Dear Daron,
I am writing to you because f have fearned that an application has been made to the city for a Crematorium at the Lakeside Cemetery. I understand the planning is close to completion and wll1 be presented to the Historic District Commission soon.

I reside in The Preserve/ Lake Natoma Shores development in which some homes are focated on Forrest St. across from t.he cemetery. Other properties back up to the cemetery from Young Wo Circle. I am concerned that many of our residents do not know of the plans that are taking place. To my knowledge we have not have had any word from the clty nor the developer regarding the proposal, This is compounded by the problem that we are not not able to gather or meet in order to have some discussions and share information.

Speaking for myself, I have some concerns I'd like to share. I believe the cemetery is zoned open space and I wonder if a cremaLorium woufd be an aflowable use for this property. Is this why the applicant is asklng for a conditionaf use permit? It afso seems unsuitabfe to have this type of facrfity adjacent to a heavily used recreational area ( brke traif and Lake NaLoma) and a residential neighborhood, I have questions regarding how it would be regulated if it were passed, as far as the actual amount of cremations taking place (not estimated) and safety with large amounts of propane on the property. T also am concerned with air quality regulating as we often have bad air days . T have asthma and am affected by bad air days & smoke. I also wondered if staLe parks have been consufted due to their property being next to the proposed area. I woufd be interested in their input.

T hope you can share my concerns with other commission members. I woufd hope if a crematorium is built in Folsom, it would be in an industrial or commerciaf areaf not by state park land where people are recreating or living. Thank you, Sincerely
Pat Binley Sutter St. Folsom, Ca.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

City of Folsom Staff and Historic District Commission
50 Natoma Street
Folsom CA 95630
Via email to
Mickey Ankhelyi -
[email protected]
December 22,2020
Pam Johns -
pjohns(@folsom.ca.us
Kathleen Cole -
[email protected]
Daron Bracht -
[email protected]
Kelly Mullett -
km u I I ett@fo I som. ca. us
Sarah Aquino
[email protected]
Josh Kincade -
j kinkad e @fol som. ca.us
SUBJECT: Lakeside Cemetery Crematorium, FILE #:19-182
I am asking for your consideration to reject the conditional use nermit requested by the owners of Lakeside Cemetery for the addition of a crematorium.

To be very clear, I am not opposed to a crematorium in Folsom.

In Summary, I believe the crematorium is not a conducive use for a historic cemetery on open spaced-zoned property. A crematorium would be better suited to be operated on a commercial or industrial area. Additionally, this is planned to be an active business with hazardous gases directly adjacent to a housing development, walking trail, historical area, and nature preserve.

This crematorium development was rejected by the City in 2002. It was a good rejection then and is good now.

Below are more details about the concerns

1. This'is a for-profit private commercial business. The crematorium will require significant infrastructure and will have consistent and growing usage. It is better suited in a commersial or industrial zoned area. (As noted in the presentation for the Zoning code changes, consistency is a key to why the Zoning code is used) a. Based on wording in the request, cremations would potentially occur at a rate of 4 per day, 5 days per week, 52 weeks per year.
b. This would be an increase of over 2000 more car trips of employees, customers and deliveries per year.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
c. Also required are the consistent and numerous propane deliveries for this enterprise. Given the outline of the process and the forecasted demand, large quantities of propane will be needed.

This is a huge business. a factory, impacting an open space-zoned property that is next to other low impact and nature areas.

2. In Section 17.52.550* see below, crematoriums are not a listed use. It is at item #8 that you will determine if a crematorium is similar and compatible. Using the list in this section, other than being in a Cemetety, a crematorium is neither similar nor compatible.

This business would be a consistent, daily, private commercial business using sophisticated equipment, stored propane, and very high temperatures. That does not align with the rest of the list that is much lower in activity and sophistication.

3. By allowing this crematorium to be moved to a commercial or industrial site, it will also move the increase in traffic so as to not impact the Historic District" as this is another issue of concern to the District.

4. Based on the Scope of Work document that was submitted, there is no sewer capabilitlu planned and there is no bathroom in the desisn document. Building this crematorium in the manner presented would be a significant development for an open spaced-zoned property. This project would continue to have alarge developing impact on the property and the historic district.

5. The applicant notes in the "Our Proposition" portion of the Scope of work that it is a "...strategic placement. It is removed from any residences, parks, or schools." This statement is incorrect. It is surrounded on two sides by park or open space. It is in an open space-zoned property and is next to a housing development. Their Proposition is not correct at a minimum and incredulous to most.

6. By allowing this to be built at a commercial or industrial property, the utilities for are installed and are capability to that
setting.

7. The Historic District is unique in our city as there is a mix of residential and business. At its basic level, that requires a mix of quality-of-life considerations of the residents and commerce for the businesses. With all of the impacting issues noted above for our district, it is much more important to weigh the quality-ofJife issues of the residents given this proposal is so out ofcharacter for an open space area.

8. This issue was brought before the City 18 years ago and received a non-approval from the City Staff. PN02-258 is the City's report for it. It was then withdrawn by the applicant.

Thank you for your consideration ofthis request.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Regards,
Paul Keast
Resident, Mormon Street, Folsom
* 17.52.550 Open space/public primary area special use and design standards.

A. Permitted Uses. When proposed by a public entity, the following uses are permitted; submittal to the historic district commission for courtesy review and comment is requested.

When proposed by a private entity, a conditional use permit is required. If, in the opinion of the planning, inspections and permitting director, public or private status of the proposing entity is not clear, the historic district commission shall make a finding on the need for a conditional use permit.
l. Natural open space, including management activities necessary for conselation and safety

2. Improved open space, including active and passive park and trail uses.

3. Transportation corridors.

4. Cemeteries.

5. Public schools, including administrative facilities.

6. Small-scale public utility structures.

7. Residential uses accessory to a public use.

8. Other public uses which are, in the opinion of the historic district commission, similar to permitted uses and compatible with surrounding uses.

In summary, please reject the Lakeside Cemetery Crematorium conditional use permit, FrLE# t9-182.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
fl,il:frtocircre
Folsom, CA 95630
July 9,2O21
Kelly Mullett
Folsom Planning Commission
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
SUBJECT: PENDING DEVETOPMENT APPLICATION FOR LAKESIDE MEMORIAL IAWN CREMATORIUM Dear Kelly -
l'm writing to express my concern for the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium project, I strongly object to approval and ask the Planning Commission to stop this project at first opportunity.

I have read the lnitial Studv/Mitieated Neeative Declaration and have also conducted my own research regarding Crematorium facilities sited adjacent to residential communities.

This project is a bad idea for the city and for residents in the immediate affected area, such as lhe'The closest existing sensitive receptors to the project site ore multiple single-fomily residences odiacent to the cemetery to the north, between 450 ond 750 feet from the proposed cremotory location" - page 22' My main concerns are:

L Potential Toxic Air Contaminants (page 21 of the study)

2. Sensitive Receptors lpaee22 of the study)

3. My research also highlighted problems in communities across the US similar to this proposed residential setting, citing objectionable odors and harmful effects from toxic air contaminants for susceptible adults, children and the elderlY.

I have a technical background and understand how "ideal" operating specifications are developed and advertised by equipment manufacturers, such as the Hartwick Combustion HCT Apex-250 crematory. These "specifications" rely on ongoing optimal operating and maintenance calibration procedures. Maintenance lapses, operator error, and prevailing weather issues like unhealthy air days, for instance, provide unwelcome downstream impacts.

I love our Folsom community and cherish our "Distinctive by Nature" motto. Placing a Crematorium within 450 feet from the "The Preserve" residential neighborhood and adjacent the parklands and Lake Natoma is a very bad idea.
, Sincerely,
Pct€r cuogQa

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
't-22-2022
City of Folsom Historic District Commission
RE: Lakeside Memorial Crematorium Project
1201 Fonest Sfieet I 070-0260'001 -0000
PlanningNo: PN-l9-182
Commissioners,
I write to you as a concerned user of the Forrest Street neighborhood recreational opportunities and as an avid amateur historian. As you are aware, the Forrest Sreet and adjoining Folsom Blvd area is replete with valuable historical sites. These include the historical Chinese Cemetery preserved by the Califomia State Park system, the Southern Pacific Superintendent's home on Oakdale St and adjacent future railroad museum, the Murer House and Education Center on Joe Murer Ct, the historic rock tailing piles located adjacent to the project location, a historic cemetery on Natomas Street, and the route of the historic Lincoln Highway along Folsom Blvd, In addition, the project abuts the Nimbus Flat State Recreation Area which includes miles of trails and recreation opportunities.

The Lakeside Memorial Crematorium Project presents several concems:

The location of an industrial crematorium in the Forrest Street neighborhood would be a non-conforming use under the City of Folsom zoning of Open Space/?ublic Primary Arca and the underlying zoning of Open Space and Conservation.

The location of an industrial crematorium in the Fonest Street neighborhood would be a non-conforming use under the Folsom City General Plan of Open Space. a
I
a The placement of an industrial crematorium in the Fonest Sffeet I Folsom Blvd area would be in conflict with the residential, recreational, and historic uses of the surrounding area.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

The CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration filed for this project is deficient with regard to the air qualrty data. The Declaration relies on weather data from tlre Sacramento Executive Airport which is located over 15 miles away. The Executive Airport lies in a separate climatic zone from the City of Folsom and is affected by Delta breezes and different wind pattems. The City of Folsom is located against the base of the Siena Foothills and suffers stagnant air patterns particularly during the summer months. These stagnant air patterns will cause the industrial pollutants to linger in the project area affecting the adjoining residential, recreational, and historical sites.

I am asking the Commission to deny the Lakeside Memorial Crematorium Project as a nonconforming use in an area of abundant historical and recreational sites.

Thank you for yow attention to this matter,
Randolph Peshon
Placerville Ca
a

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Frcm:

To:

Date:

Subject: Proposed Lakeside Crematorium
Sunday, January 23,2022 6:19:03 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,
I live in the Lake Natoma Shores neighborhood where there is talk of a proposed Crematorium at The Lakeside Memorial Cemetery.

Our neighborhood is quite unique in many ways. A lot of families live here, it's the only housing community on this side of Folsom Boulevard, and also the only community that is on Lake Natoma. Our housing development is located in the canyon across from the bluffs of Lake Natoma.

The Kikkoman plant is located a mile away. A couple times a week we can smell the soy beans roasting. lf we drive by the plant we don't see any smoke. Even though there isn't any smoke, the smell lingers in our neighborhood getting trapped by The Schultz Eddy phenomenon. This causes the wind pattern to shift southward, blowing air pollutants back into the SVAB (Sacramento Valley Air Basin). This phenomenon exacerbates the concentration of air pollutant emissions in the air basin and contributes to violations of the ambient air quality standards. Living in the canyon under the bluff keeps the air stagnant.

The Caring Services Group (Miller Funeral Home) says there won't be any smoke and only heat waves from their industrial furnace. However, who's to say the smell and carcinogens from the furnace won't stagnate in the air from the bluffs just like the Kikkoman smell. The smell of roasting soybeans and the smell of burning flesh are two different things. This would also effect kayakers, paddle boarders, bicyclists, walkers, and birdwatchers in the State Park area which butts right up against the crematorium. How's that for trying to enjoy nature? I thought we were "Distinctive by Nature".

During the 1111122 cifi council meeting there was much concern for the preservation of the oak trees with the south of Hwy 50 development. I hope the Commission gives the Historic District, open space, and residents of The Preserves/Lake Natoma Shores community as much time, concern, and thoughtfulness as the oak trees received.
lf one wanted to be environmentally conscience we would be considering Aquamation to cremation. lf the population and need for after death services continues to grow we should be installing eco-friendly alternatives. We shouldn't be considering an old shed to save money. lf Aquamation is good enough for Bishop Desmond Tutu, it's good for

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
usl
This crematorium has to be stopped in its tracks. l'm truly concerned for my family, neighbors, and Folsom residents.

Thanks,
Sean Gates

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Josh Kinkade
From:

Sent:
lo:

Subject:

FYI
Kelly Mullett
Adnini str atile Assi.s ton f
Community Development Department
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
O: 916.461 .6231
F:916.355.7274
!rr r li
Kelly Mullett
Monday, luly 12,2021 8:14 AM
Josh Kinkade
FW: Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium Concerns
roLF$xil
rr ErrrlrtYc l! ;a!u:I
Og@ www.fotsom.ca.us
From: Sean Gates
Sent: Sunday, July 1.1, 2O2L L:46 PM
To: Mike Kozlowski <[email protected]>; Sarah Aquino <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; Rosario Rodriguez <[email protected]>; Kelly Mullett <kmullett@folso
Cc: david higgins
m.ca.us>; thehfra ail.com
Subject: Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium Concerns
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,
I am reaching out because I am extremely concerned about the proposal to build a crematorium at the Lakeside Cemetery..,
My wife Nicole and I belong to the Historic Folsom Residents Association, and the area we live in means a lot to us.

We have two children (ages 9 and7l, and in researching online the impact of crematorium use, large amounts of mercury get released into the air, along with various other particulate matter.

I can't have my family living next to this type of threat to our health, and there are several other families who live in our area, along with those who are a bit older and more susceptible to health issues.

It doesn't make any sense to me that a crematorium would be located in a residential area that is experiencing and will continue to experience an increase in population density. Crematorium use also appears to be on the rise recently as well.
1

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Can we please instead have this crematorium located in a more industrial area, that is not located in such a densely populated location?
-Sean Gates
2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Powering forward. Together.

OsMUU
Sent Via E-Mail
February 4,2022
Josh Kinkade, Associate Planner
City of Folsom
Com m un ity Development Department
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
ikinkade@folsom. ca. us
Subject: Lakeside Memorial Lawn Grematorium / MND / 2022010039 Dear Mr, Banks
The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium (Project, SCH 202010039). SMUD is the primary energy provider for Sacramento County and a portion of the proposed Project area. SMUD's vision is to empower our customers with solutions and options that increase energy efficiency, protect the environment, reduce globalwarming, and lower the cost to serve our region. As a Responsible Agency, SMUD aims to ensure that the proposed Project limits the potential for significant environmental effects on SMUD facilities, employees, and customers.

We have no comments to offer at this time but would appreciate if the City of Folsom would continue to keep SMUD facilities in mind as environmental review of the Project moves forward. Please reroute the Project analysis for SMUD's review if there are any changes to the scope of the Project.
lf you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at 916.732.7466, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Ammon Rice
Environmental Services Supervisor
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
6201 S Street
Sacramento, CA 95817
cc: Entitlements
SMUD HA | 6201 S Street I P.O.Box 15830 | Sacramento. CA95852-1830 | 1.88A.742.7683 | smud.org

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Powering forward. Together.

OsMUU
Sent Via E-Mail
February 4,2022
Josh Kinkade, Associate Planner
City of Folsom
Com mun ity Development Department
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
ikinkade@folsom. ca. us
Subject: Lakeside Memorial Lawn Grematorium / MND / 2022010039 Dear Mr. Banks
The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium (Project, SCH 202010039). SMUD is the primary energy provider for Sacramento County and a portion of the proposed Project area. SMUD's vision is to empower our customers with solutions and options that increase energy efficiency, protect the environment, reduce globalwarming, and lower the cost to serve our region. As a Responsible Agency, SMUD aims to ensure that the proposed Project limits the potential for significant environmental effects on SMUD facilities, employees, and customers.

We have no comments to offer at this time but would appreciate if the City of Folsom would continue to keep SMUD facilities in mind as environmental review of the Project moves fonrvard. Please reroute the Project analysis for SMUD's review if there are any changes to the scope of the Project.
lf you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at 916.732.7466, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Ammon Rice
Envi ronmental Services Supervisor
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
6201 S Street
Sacramento, CA 95817
cc: Entitlements
SMUD HA | 6201 S Street I P.O.Box 15830 | Sacramento, CA 95852-1830 | 1.888.742.7683 | smud.ors

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Steve Wetzel
lvoung wo circle
Folsom, CA 95630
February 6,2022
City of Folsom Historic District Commission.

RE: opposition to the proposed Lakeside Memorial Cemetery crematorium Dear Planning Commissioners;
I am a resident living next to the Lakeside Memorial Cemetery where the owner wants to add a crematorium.

I am writing to ask you, as Planning Commission, to act to protect residents from a business requesting to change the business from burial to cremation and in doing so will add a new revenue stream and increase profits. The business has spent an amount of money considered significant to any one resident to write up a proposal that supports the business' desire to add to their revenue and profits.

The Planning Commission needs to act in a way to level the playing field and to stand up for our Residents, young and old. The residents do not have the financial resources available to the business, to defend our position with lawyers and agencies to write counter-proposals. We have our voices and have done our best to communicate our positions.

A crematorium should not be allowed to be added to a residential neighborhood. lt should only be allowed to be added to a industrial or business area, such as a warehouse or non-retail area.

I personally do not understand how creating a new revenue stream for a business could outweigh the request for residents to maintain our existing lifestyle without pollutants (mercury for one), or odors, or smoke, added to the air we breathe every day of our lives. The residents should not have to be exposed to the odor, smoke, or pollutants, from a crematorium just so this business owner can increase his profits. Dead bodies come with implants and joint replacements, along with personal items the family wants burned with the bodies. All these along with the body and the box will create odors and pollutants regardless of what the owner may have paid for to be written up in his proposal.

Please do the right thing and use common sense. lf all you can do is act according to reports created by private consultants then I do not understand what purpose you, the Commission, serve other than to give a stamp of approval to businesses to do whatever they want regardless of the effect on nearby residents.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Please decline this business owner his request for a conditional permit. Please deny his request so that we can live in peace in our neighborhood without fear of having the little cemetery next door to start emitting odor, smoke, and pollutants from burning hundreds of cremations each month.

As you may or may not be aware, cremations account for about 50% of all deaths currently and it is expected to increasetoT5%-8O%inthe next l-0 years. This business owner wants in on that revenue. He should happily do it in another location and not in a residential neishborhood but in a business or warehouse area where he could easily make money. He is only proposing it in the little shack at Lakeside Memorial Cemetery because he will have larger profits using a cheap existing structure. There are many options to place a crematorium elsewhere, not adjacent to a residential neighborhood, and still make good profits. Please deny the business owner the ability to cremate at this location.

Thank you for reading my beliefs
Steve Wetzel
lYoung wo
Folsom, CA 95530

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Josh Kinkade
From:

Sent:
lo:

Subject:

FYI
KellyMullett
Arlrr r iri i.sl rcr lilc ls.sisl o ti I
Community Development Department
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
O:916.461.6231
F:916.355.7274
Kelly Mullett
Tuesday, September 7,2021 1 1:0B AM
Josh Kihkade
FW: Another Crematorium Letter
imx.mi,#"qm
0 S @ wwvy fotsoi'r1.ca.us
From: Daron Bracht <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 7,202t 11:52 AM
To: Kelly Mullett <[email protected]>
Subject: Another Crematorium Letter
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:proposed Crematoriu m
Date:Mon, 5 Sep 202L 19:L4:30 +0000 (UTC)
From:Steve
To:[email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, daron br@ pacbell. net <da ron br@ pacbell. net>
Hello DanielWest, Kevin Duewel, and Daron Bracht (Historic District Commissioners:); I am writing you to register my protest to the Lakeside Cemetery requesting to put in a crematorium in the city of folsom - specifically the Lakeside cemetery along the Preserve neighborhood and State Parks open space recreation area also adjacent to Forrest Street.
1

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

I am writing you three as I believe Daniel and Kevin are on the Planning Commission and Daron on the Historic Preservation. Should I have sent it to all 7 on the Historic District Commission? I don't know how these things work but hope I can get this to the right people representing the city residents.

I don't believe or trust that a crematorium can be operated without putting polutants into the air and affecting residents and the recreation area nearby. I don't care what the specifications are the Lakeside Cemetery provides you. The air emitted from burning a human being, clothing, chemicals injected into the dead body, and cardboard box will contain smoke, odor, and chemicals. From what I understand the USA does not require a crematorium to have filters that would remove all this. Additionally, if Lakeside says they would put them in voluntarily, I still don't trust the cemetery to do it because they are not "required" to put them in and therefore at the last minute can omit them.

Please join me in siding with the residents of Folsom and rejecting this request from the Lakeside Cemetery to put in a crematorium. And again, I would suggest you don't approve a crematorium any where in our city limits. A crematorium should be located in an area far from residents and is more suited for a warehouse area (like Rancho Cordova south of 50) than an area next to homes and recreation.

Thank you for reading my request.

Steve Wetzel
Folsom Resident
2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Josh Kinkade
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
Get Outlook for Android
Scott Johnson
Monday, September 6,2021 7:58 PM
Josh Kinkade
Fwd: No Crematorium
From: SUSAN LUBIENS
Sent: Monday, Septembe r 6, 2O2t 7 :54:26 PM
To: Scott Johnson <sjoh [email protected]>
Subject: No Crematorium
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Stop the crematorium at Lakeside!
Susan Lubiens
Resident since 1971
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Terrv Sorensen
lroitust street
Folsom, CA 95630
February 7,2422
Historic Disftict Commission
City of Folsom
50 Natoma Street
Foisom, CA 95630
RE: Lakeside Memorial Lawn crematorium Proposal (PN-19-182) Hearing Date: FebruarY 16, 2022
Dear Commissioners:

The same crematorium proposal herein under consideration was advanced by Lakeside nearly L9 years ago as pNgz-Zsg and sCheduled for hearing before this Commission on January 15, 2003' However that hearing was canceled and did not go forward when applicant Lakeside withdrew the proposal, apparentlyln [ght of a Staff Report prepared by the City recommending the denial of a Conditional tjse permit (cup) ro operate "
item^to.ium on the property, A copy of that staff Report (with voluminous attachments) is attached as Exhibit *A'"
The findings advanced in the Staff Report as the basis for its recommendation of denial can be summarized as follows:
a. The use applied for is detrimental to the health, safety or generai welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood, and detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighbJrhood andihe general welfare of the City because the introduction of this use will impact the historical character of the existing cemetery and historical use of the area. b. The conglomeration of historic cemeteries, combined with the California State Dredger Tailings dating bick to the 1850's, create a rare combination of unique cultural resources that will be impacted bY this ProPosal.
c. The use of the proposed project is not consistent with Goal 2 of the City's Historic District Design and Developrunt Guideiines in that it does not maintain the historic use of the site and, in addition, does not further Design and Development Guideline Policies 2.'l',2.2, and 2.3 in that:

1. The Sacramento County Historic Cemetery Commission has identified this site as locally significant and intends io present the Lakeside Cemetery to the Board of Supervisors for designation as a historic pioneer cemetery;
Z. Appioval of a CUp for a contemporary use that will jeopardize the eligibility status of the site would work to discourage, rather than encourage, national register nomination; and

3. According to the sacramento county Historic cemetery commission, a crematorium is not a consistent use with a historic cemetery'
In summary, the CUp sought by the applicant in this instance is identical to the CUP sought back in early 2003, and the applic-ant fras presented no facts to the contrary. The proposal for the issuance of a

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
cUp allowing the construction and operation of a crematorium in the historic area in question was a bad idea back in 2003 and remains a bad idea today. The factual basis and logic behind the 2003 Staff Report remain valid, ald the current request for approval of a CUP for the proposed crematory should be denied for the reasons expressed theiein. Such a resolution of this matter would be simple and straightforward and consistent with the City's advertised goal of promoting historic preservation.

In closing, one is left to wonder why the City fails to mcntion anywhere in its papers submitted on this matter th-e applicant,s prior efforts nearlyl-9 years ago to obtain a CUP for a crematorium on the Lakeside ptbp.tty andthe Crty's opposition thereto. Seemingly, full disclosure by the City of those facts sho;ld h^u. b.un forthcoming. The citizenry of Folsom deserve no less.

Very truiy yours,
. Sorensen
TS/dg
attachment: 2003 Staff Report PN02-258
cc by email: [email protected]
j ulitin@revoltttionsdqcs'coltt
da n w estrtt i t@Y ahoo.com
[email protected]
i qhtt fel ts@e 55 teclr.co m
m. dascall os @)Y ahoo. com
j [email protected]. us
kmul I ettfD fo lsom.ca. us

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

PROJECT TITLE:

PROPOSAL:

RECOMMENDATION:

APPLICANT AFID OW]TIER:

LOCATION:

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
o
Agenda Item No.l
PN02-258
HDC Mtg. l-15-03
Lakeside Cemetery Crematorium
Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit
to allow for the operation of crematorium
Denial
Lorin Claney
l20l Forrest Street
070-0082-014, 070-01 30-002, 070-0130-004
a
a
W'#ndr/u^/

HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
ATTACHED REFERENCE MATERIAL: 1. Vicinity Map

2. Site Plan, datedlZll9/91

3. Project Description and Crematorium
Illustrations

4. Documentation frorn the Sacramento
County Historic Cemetery Commission

5. Lakeside Cemetery Research Paper
written by Sue Silver

6. Letters from the Public

7. Site Photographs
PROJECT PLAI\[\ER: Jane Talbot, Assistant Planner

BACKGROTIND
The Planning Commission approved a Use Permit and Variance for Mausoleums at Lakeside Memorial Lawn in 1991 (PC91-042). An amendment to the approval was granted in 1995 (PC95-033). That approval allowed for the construction of twelve mausoleums. To date, one mausoleum has been built and one additional mausoleum is under construction. An existing maintenance building, approximately 975 square feet in area, is located along the south border of the cemetery. The front of the project site is mostly level with a slight to moderate downward slope towards the rear of the site. Lakeside Cemetery has a variety of mature deciduous and evergreen trees. The front of the cemetery, along Forrest Street, is bounded by a brick wall capped with wrought iron fencing.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
The project site consists of three parcels totaling l0 acres within the Open Spaceilublic Primary Area of the Historic District. It is located on the west side of Folsom Boulevard at l20l Forrest Street. The property is bounded by the Chung Wah Cemetery and the American River Recreation Area to the west, single-family residences to the north, Fonest Steet to the east, and mine tailings to the south. Across Forrest Street are single-family residences' o

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to install and operate a crematorium at the existing Lakeside Cemetery at l20l Forrest Street. The applicant proposes to install the cremation equipment inside an existing maintenance building as indicated on the attached site plan. The maintenance building is made of comrgated metal and currently is used for the storage of grounds maintenance equipment. The applicant proposes to install a l0-foot by 30- foot'oTuffShed" adjacent to the existing maintenance building to store the displaced maintenance equipment. No new utilities are proposed to be corurected to the shed.

GENERAL PLAN/ZODIING CONFORMANCE
The General Plan land use designation for the project site is OS (Open Space). The zoning designation for the project site is OS/PB (Open Space/Public Primary Area of the Historic District). The zoning district is consistent with the General Plan designation. Cemeteries are a permitted use within the OS/PB zoning upon approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The subject cemetery has been in operation since the 1800's and is a permitted use. Crematoriums are not specifically addressed in the Folsom Municipal Code. Such uses that are not specifically addressed within the Folsom Municipal Code require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.

LAITD USE COMPATIBILITY/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
When approving a Conditional Use Permit, the Historic Disfict Commission must make a finding that a project's impact on health, safety and welfare will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of a proposed use. Some of the comments received suggest that the proposed project may impact health, safety, and welfare. Without additional environmental studies, staff cannot support or refute any of these assertions GMC 17.60). As staff is recommending denial, based upon the appropriateness of the land use, these necessary additional environmental studies have not been prepared. Should it be the Historic District Commission's desire to proceed with this application, staffwill cornmence with the additional environrnental studies.

Historical Significance
Information provided to staffillustates that Lakeside Cemetery is actually a conglomeration of several cemeteries that have merged over the years. This conglomeration includes the Citizen's, Jewish, Masonic, Negro Bar, Cook's/American Legion, and Odd Fellows cemeteries that date back to around 1850. Adjacent to this site is the Chung Wah Chinese Cemetery. These cemetery sites, along with the neighboring Califomia State Dredger Tailings Preserve, create a combination of rare cultural resources grouped into one small area. This combination, in itsele is an extremely unique resource according to Commissioners with the Sacramento County Historic Cemetery Commission.
2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Goal 2 of the Design and Development Guidelines defines the City's objective for the Preservation of Historic Sites as:
'To maintain, restore, and reconsffuct sites which represent the history of the Folsom area.' The supporting policies indicate how the City can accomplish this goal. Policy 2.1 states that locally significant strucfires and sites should be identified and documented to facilitate their preservation or restoration. To date, Commissioners from Sacrarnento County Historic Cemetery Commission have identified this site as locally signifrcant, and the Commissioners intend to present Lakeside Cemetery to the Sacramento Board of Supervisors for designation as an historic cemetery.

Policy 2.2 advocates that the City should encourage National Register nomination of historic buildings, as well as other historical designations by state or local agencies. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a contemporary land use (i.e., the crematorium) may jeopardize the eligibility status of the site and might work to discourage rather than to encourage National Register nomination.

Policy 2.3 explains the priorities with which the City should evaluate proposed projects. The preference should be given to authentic restoration of historical buildings and sites. Based on the information provided to staffby the Sacramento County Historic Cemetery Commission, a crematorium is not a consistent, or authentic, use with a historic cemetery. Therefore, staffhas determined that the proposed project is not consistent with Policies2.l,2.2,2.3, and Goal 2 of the Design and Development Guidelines.

PTTBLIC INPUT
The applicant held a community meeting to inform the public about this project on November 19, 2002. There was much public opposition to the project at that meeting. At the meeting, issues related to property values, air quality, traffic, and cultural resources were raised. During the public comment period, staffreceived comments from rurmerous individuals and organizations. (The written comments received are attached to this report.) The information received indicates that a crematorium is not a use that is consistent in historic cemeteries.

ENYIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were originally published on August 29, 2002. Staffreceived feedback regarding the Initial Study. A number of issues relating to the proposed use were raised including land use and planning, noise, air quality, hazardous materials, and cultural resources. As stated previously, staffhas determined that the proposal is not compatible with the existing historical character of the cemetery, and staff is recommending denial of the request. According to the California Environmental Quality Act, *CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves." Should the Historic District Commission conclude that the proposal is compatible with the existing historic cemetery use, the Commission will need to direct staffto conduct further research on the issues raised on this project and retum to the Commission with the appropriate environmental document. 3

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o

STAI'F RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a crematorium at an existing cemetery at l20l Forrest Street in the Historic Distict, based on the following finings.

HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ACTION

MOVE TO DENY THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A CREMATORIUM AT AN EXISTING CEMETERY AT I2O1 FORREST STREET IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

FINDINGS FOR DENIAL
A. NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN AT THE TIME AND IN THE MANNER REQI.IIRED BY STATE LAW AND CITY CODE.
o
B. THE USE APPLIED FOR IS DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY, OR

GENERAL WELFARE OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD, AND DETRIMENTAL OR INruRIOUS TO PROPERTY AND

IMPROVEMENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE

CITY BECAUSE THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS USE WILL IMPACT THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE DilSTING CEMETERY AND HISTORICAL USE OF THE AREA.

C. THE CONGLOMERATION OF HISTORIC CEMETERIES, COMBINED WITH THE CALIFORMA STATE DREDGER TAILINGS DATING BACK TO THE 1850'5, CREATE A RARE COMBINATION OF I.JNIQUE CULTURAL RESOURCES THAT WILL BE IMPACTED BY THIS PROPOSAL.

D. THE USE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS NOT CONSISTENT WIfiI GOAL 2 OF THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT GI.IIDELINES IN THAT IT DOES NOT MAINTAIN TITE HISTORIC USE OF THE SITE. IN ADDITION, THE PROJECT DOES NOT FURTHER DESIGN A}ID DEVELOPMENT GI.JIDELINE POLICIES 2.I,2.2, AND 2.3 IN THAT:

1. COMMISSIONERS FROM SACRAMENTO COI.JNTY HISTORIC CEMETERY COMMISSION HAVE IDENTIFIED THIS SITE AS LOCALLY SIGNIFICANIT, A}'ID

COMMISSIONERS INTEND TO PRESENT LAKESIDE CEMETERY TO THE

SACRAMENTO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR DESIGNATION AS AN HISTORIC CEMETERY.

2. APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONTEMPORARY USE T}IAT WILL JEOPARDIZBTI1E ELIGIBILITY STATUS OF THE SITE WOULD

WORK TO DISCOURAGE, RATHER THAN TO ENCOURAGE, NATIONAL
REGISTER NOMINATION.

3. BASED ON A LETTER FROM JAMES A. PURCELL, CHAIRMAN OF THE

SACRAMENTO COUNTY HISTORIC CEMETERY COMMISSION DATED
JAT{UARY 2,2003,4 CREMATORIUM IS NOT A CONSISTENT USE WITH A HISTORIC CEMETERY.
4

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Attachment 1
Vicinity Map

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
:.ild'.:G..j -r-1
@mlCUSaru aqt --zFEi'i*
fr@ffirolW ilss'Et*m6 U
xoltr3tJIlaES lf, dns
l-_L
: T'_T'
,I
I.l
I I r- -l l' l^t^rns .fl rujcNrl.r69!/,Y$F I . qtqE
Frffi-'Fl4qFts
srt
----1 I
I .t
e,lrt
I
J_ -lI
z lf
I
I
I
-t #s"i -l i;i;;l F4. ;i
.t
f
,!
I
tl
.t
r3ldrs vou3tlrj I'
I
I
Ir
-l- r
-rI _t
lt
r
t_
({
l:
r:- .! ffi,_ t_
Merlsrlrt
I
L
I
lc, I
I
-l
-t
I
I
\----\
,#;i.;.
ffirxr{'
l*-*
-f,ft.sraE l.rotssn vNlHc
rE&-t!d.Ewtt.
a
a
r -r.ren-dEq]'sx)lE Etlu dYF
CEE-
-J-.-J
LtT
_t -l
I
'ias..t--t
d-rft.
'#ffiffigss r.Tffifi''EffiME .rd xu*-x
-rd--ail ..:.. ,4!tqrDt{0t6F
1,.
t,
I
,09 - .r : IwfE
q
r-q*
zj
4i lot
L3 901 I t0 16 zo,l r0l tor
a
;i.

ItLI
flm.6
/

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Attachment2
Site Plan, dated l2lI9l97

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Loggttd
-trr lteilyLh. C]CS lir
-
Prs6Ro.d
::::::: r,mil.dlb.d
-l
EtrteBEg
- -.- - Fcra
(Arrbgr Flvtr)
Figurc 2 plglgTExistlng .Development
Yo(,irc wo cncLE
b6-l.nc4tt

AREAMAUSOI-EI,JM
tu
u
E
b
$
t
I
I
It
I
I
aI
I
II
I
I
5a-i!.Hh
6-ridoF.d)
(ClSrltdon)
FO?€
SNEET
o
329
_, t".
ir
(Rocl( Grrdd Pf.!)
o
La side Memorial Lawn
folsom,
(*rsbtudt
Fdd&0
o
o
O
r)
c
ork
Fr.*r
o
C.drr O
c
PiE
Pdh
++
++
.-,
clr?d
ffiEbFrr*t F.ddcts.l)

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Attachment 3
Project Description and Crematorium Illustrations

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Form G101- General Information

1. Equipment Iocation Drawing:

Attached
2, Description of F4uipment:

Manufacturer: Industrial Equipment & Engineering Co. dba All Crematory Model: 2500 Elite (identical to IEE Power-Pak II)
Description: Multiple chamber, gas fired, l00lb/hr bum rate cremator

3. Description of Process:

The All Model 2500 Elite is designed to coniplete a typical cremation case in 2 hours.

This time does not include the preheat of the sccondary chamber, which is typically 1/2 hour or the cool-down period before the removal of the remains (l/2 hour). The cremator has a nominal burn rate of 100 lb/hr of remains and the associated containers, based on the entire cremation period. The cremator is a multiple chamber design and is fired with natural or LP gas as an arixiliary fuel, [t is designed to be manually loaded in batches.

Typically, the remains are loaded in the primary chamber and then the secondary chamber is preheated by the secondary burner for 30 minutes or until the required minimum temperature is reached. The primary burner is then ignited to begin the cremation cycle. A cool-down period of 30 minutes or more is recommended at the end of the cremation cycle before removing the cremated remains and loading the next batch of remains.

The secondary chamber has a volurne of 70 ft3. It has one secondary burner that is adjusted to a maximum high fire setting of 1.4 MM Btu/hr.

The secondary chamber temperature is monitored by a digital controller which adjusts the gas flow to the secondary burner to maintain the desired temperature. The cremator performs best and is most fuel efficient with a secondary chamber temperature of 1400 to 1600:F.

The primary'chamber volume has a volume of 69 ft3. It has one primary burner that is adjusted to a maximum of 0.6 MM Btu/hr. The chamber temperature ranges from 500 T at the beginning of the first cremation of the day to 1600 olF or more during successive cremations.

The opacity alarm monitor system automatically takes action to eliminate visible ernissions. If the opacity of the flue gases exceeds number I on the Ringelmann scale the controls will make sure the secondary air supply (throat air) is on and also turn off the primary burner to slow down the buming rate.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
The All Crcrnatory Model 2500 Elite is identical to the IEE Power-Pak II. A Power-Pak II unit was installed at North sacramento Funeral Home in 1995. 4: ' Facility Description:

Funeral home.

5. Operating Schedule:

Up to 10 hours per day; up to 7 days per week; 52 weelcs per year. Maximum usage "ipr"t"a
to be Ess than 2000 hours per year (800 cremations).

6. Process Weieht:

The nominal burn rate is 100 lb/hr.

7. Fugls and Bumers Used:

Fuel is natural gas. Usage is 2000 scf/hr max.

8. Flow Diagram
Attached.
g. EouiomentDrawings
A,B
c
Attached.

Blower motor is 5 hP.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

PRocf,rt FLow nrfbRAM

CREMATOR

EMISSIONS

TEMPERATURE

MONITOR

RECORDER OPTIONAL

OR AS REQUIRED
BY I.AW

REMAINS
TYPE 0&4
WASTE

CREMATED

REMAINS

CREMATED

REMAINS

FAMILIES
STACK
DRAFT

INDUCER

BURIAL OR

CREMATION

SERVICE

SECONDARY CHAMBER PRIMARY

CHAMBER HEARTH AIR
THROAT
AIR

SECONDARY
BURNER
(ArrERBunNrn)

PRIMARY
BURNER
FUEL
l.+
mm Btu/hr
FUEL
D,TJ
mm Btu/hr

AIR BLOWER
l00o
SCTM Page 1063
05/10/2022 Item No.18.
4cl [ror6mh]
_tflI RO|IER
LOI(Il.rc
000R
F N
:E:

B
c
ao
I
6 o
a
5',-t
6'-t
t3oNLB.n4iIpN
llxc v['llt
@
ufltr.rc tuc ({ rora)
l,t tN gtgcTRrc L
coNl.lecnoils Eox
t
t4
AlI CREA,IATORY
PST WX 5,.721a onL$€o, RoRDA
Br-orvER
o
rccEss PAlrEt
AccEss PAI.IEDn^n INOUCER
b
I
I
b
J.

E
qN
€
I
b
atF _, I tih-l I nEuor^Btl 0o0R 11000 strcK s.'slEra
El,(lSK,f.l cor{noL
RECEIV€R
l/AX. LEl.lGlH
0@R HOOO E REIfI'AEII FO8
ftsrAUInoN
ruFPOSES
c gilEr
oa{
IEFT SIOE OR REUdIE

STACK RNG
o85€F/AIX)N
PORT
At{c}roR ur (4 rora)
tutN
C,'RilER
ET6SDlrCONIRd.IRAI{SI{TIER
12'-6'
1t'-6
aatsIll9g'ElE/dru
/ [5rml RP GAS CONNEC'ION Qea |+I t5os--l I
E
Eooo
gJ
b
b!a-I3Ac
q
2500 Elitc
I
,r o(NG ruc (.)
(oPTroN^L)
TE.FERAruf,E
REC0fio€R
BEAR E-EV^IION
e!.ld-gE!
Elevetions
2-

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
Attachment 4
Documentation from the
Sacramento County Historic Cemetery Commission
o

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
Sacramento County Cemetery Advisory
48oo Broadway, Suite roo
Sacramento CA 9582o
t**ission
Attr: Jane Talbot
DearMs Talbot::

The sacramento county cemetery Advisory commission is in receipt of yourNotice of public Hearing,"g*ci"g pN 02-i5s Conditional Use Permit and MitigatedNegative Declaration 1201 Forrest Street.

The corn:nission is charged with the duty to encourage the preservation and Jrrign"tioo of historical-cemeteries. We are currently pre,paring a list of those-cemeteries in Sacramento county, which should be considered historic. It is my opinion that.

Lakeview Cemetery *itt U. one of the cemeteries in Sacranento County that will be on the list that is to bcpresented to the Board of supervisors for designation as an historic cemetery.
while no official action has yet been taken by either The cemetery Advisory Commission or The Board oisupervisors regarding Lakeview Cemetery we ask that you consider the above mentioned conditional usi permit in the context of Lakeview's historic significance and endeavor to preserve its historic elements.

Sincerely,
City of Folsom Historic Dishict Commission
50 Natoma Sheet
Folsom, CA 95630
James A. Purcell, Chairman
Cemetery Advisory Commission
sfis e $ sJ&
:1
,i.f
* tt4i{t$Yffi,F l*lf tf+
t annesA- Vice Chair, Dr. Robert La Perriere

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

OO
sacramento county cemetery Advis ory commission
48oo Broadqay, Suite roo
Sacramento CA 958zo
January 2,2003
Ms. Jane Talbot
city of Folsom Planning, lnspections and permitting Department 50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
Dear Ms Talbot:

The sacramento c:ql!-Boqrd of supervisors on June 12,2oo1approved ordinance No. scc-11g3, which established rhe sacramento codrity Cemetery Advisory Commission (The Commission).

The purpose of the advisory commission is:
1' To advise the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors on citizen,s concerns and issues related to cemeteries; 2' To provide recommendations to preserve, protect, and maintain cemeteries; 3' To make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors regarding mechanisms for funding the preservation, protection and maintenance of cemeteries and the appropriation of funds so raised; and

4. To encourage the preservation and designation of historical cemeteries.

With regard.to number 4,.above, and in reference to your: request for comments on the proposalfor a crematorium at Lakeside Cemetery,in" coinmission would like to submit the following:

The^ar99 incorporating Lakeside Cemetery,.the Chung Wah Historic Cemetery, and the California State Dredging Tailings Park is possibly-the only s1e in tne State ot California that combines these important aspects of our heritage in one smaff area. Lakeside cgpetery, in fact, may be a grouping of lgth dentury which would most likely fit the criteria Lurrently being-developed "emeterier, to olrine a nistoric cemetery. lt is the opinion of The Commission thatihe addiiion of " crematorium on that site would have a. negative impact on the historical significanc" oin" "r"a. lt is believed that a crematorium could be placed in an industrlalarea within FoLom to avoid the impact on the history of our countywide community Chair, James A. purcell Vice Chair, Dr. Robert La. perriere

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Ms. Jane Talbot
.Ja4uary 2,2403

o o
Area residents have notified our Commission that they oppose the placement of the crematorium on the site.

Research that has been provided to our Commission indicates that there have been instances in which monuments, and copings have been moved or destroyed, plot maps of burial locations are misplaced and that legalquestions exist regardin! tne ownership of portions of Lakeside Cemetery. Further degradation of the historic value of the cemetery by the addition of a crematorium would only serve to lessen its cultural importance to the City of Folsom and Sacramento County.

Please contact us if we can provide any other lnformation or support.

Sincerely,
James A. Purcell, Chairman
Sacramento County Cemetery Advisory Commission
cc Historic District Commission
50 Natoma Street
Folsom CA 95630

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Fax (916) 48L-8229
Dr. Bob l.aPerriere
POB 255345
Socro*ento CA q5865-514d
Phoo" (9L6\ 48I-4525
E-ail' dtb"[email protected]."orn
Jane Talbot ,
Planning, Inspections and Permitting Department
City of Folsom
50 Natoma Street
Folsorn CA gsoro
Dear Jane:

In referel.lce to y_ouJ reques_t for comments on the proposal for a crematorium at Lakeside, ,Cemetely, 'I 'am happy to iubmit the , fgllowing .. as
^
an indivi{uali
"'
I'" havJ, 1 been 1 fi;ffed'lo- lr#r.i}V
p.reservalion for almost"'2O yeais. , :i- - : I ---:
_1) Thr area incorporating Lak-esi{e c-emetery, the_Historic chung yah Chinese Qeln-ete1y, -and rhe California siate nreuger raiiffi
Preserve is probably the only site in our State that'com6ines theie aspects 9f 9ur. heritage in one small area. Jo add a crematorium, ryith sugh limited acreage, it would not only be very close to uri three of these sites,.bu.t would have an extrernely nelative impact on the setting, continsity, agsthetlqs, and
-hirdi;ui -rignincance
of
lhis are.a. .
-
The idea that State Parks may someday" de"elof an instructional trail by or _through the tailings p6.r'1,'J is a disltinii reality. .

Thq view of actiiitieg at -th? -t;r*tii" *;i;;;; crematorium location would be clearly evideirt to viiitois bn the trall, .A .{"patorium could be placed ih **yt ottt.t'tu*ur, ilh ,; an industrial area,'without the impact it would have on U"ttr =ittlra

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
oo j
historic sites and the residential neighborhood adjoining. 2) Thgre ar9 also non historic concerns. Because of the many recent reports of problems at crematories, more and more families 3re requ-esting to view the cremation process. The planned location, in a rather crude metal building, is certainly noi a respectfui oi comforting setting for this. - r 3) I also have concern regarding the operation of a crematorium in a cemetery tha!
,
has apparently bgen plagued by multiple and u{o1tu1ate probl.ems. over many decades.- A local newspaper article apo$ lve decades agg stated there was no furth"r rpri"?ot burials in Folsom, yet burials have continued in Lakesid6. There are many storier, of copings,
.
and ppssibly monuments, having
been movpd or destroye4: a lack oT_ adeqirate plat maps'in som6 areas, and ey-en gueslions reg_alding the ownership of certain areas of Lakeside. The fact that SCI turned the cemet'ery bacf io its current owners .vv might suggesr that they e*;ilrJrJ;rh
concerns.

Lakeside Cemetery: ag^ I- am sure you ar€ aware, is really a grouping orplqrp!- 19th cenrury ""rnt"i"r idri""nlr, Jewish, Masonic and Odd Fellows, dates as early as lg50), all of which i consider historic. It would be extremelf unfotiunil" it uOditional negative factors, -sych as the installation- of a crematorium] 1tl;G; impacted these historic cemeteries...the final resting plaie of tb manY of 9ur pioneers and early settlers who were r6sfonsiblJ ioi creating the great region that we all live in and enjoy toiay.

Please contact me if I can provide any other information or support.

Dr. Bo LaPerriere
cc: Historic District Commission

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Attachment 5
Lakeside Cemetery Research Paper
Written by Sue Silver

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o

LAKESIDE CEMETERY
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Also known as the
Negro Bar Mining Canp Cemetery,
Old Masonic Cemetery New Masonic Cemetery,
Odd Fellows Cemetery, Cook's / American Legion Cemetery, Citizens', Folsom City, and Folsom Cemetery
and
Folsom Jewish Cemetery
Researchd Compiled and Written
by
Sue Silver
(First Draft published: June 27, 1999)
Updated: December 8, 2002

WRITER'S PREFACE
This was not an easy study for me nor was there any joy in locating the information about those who were buried in the cemetery and can never be found again. I have lived through nightnares of the worst kind and have spent hours contemplating how I might [relp rnake what has happened to this cemetery understandable.

I have leamed to live with the knowledge that I cannot correct the years of abuse this cemetery has suffered. I knew I could not live without telling its tnre story.

The research performed for this study was begun in late 1994 and was continued until December of 1997, and is not yet considered completed. In researching, I found that many years of death notices and obituaries will need to be located utilizing the Sacramento papers as many editions arc not available from the local Folsom Telegraph during those early years. For the most part, I have supplemented the very earliest years, those which encompass information written at the time of the Negro Bar mining camp (1850 - 1856) tluough those first pivotal years of the birth of the Town of Folsom (1856 - 1868). It was mainly these years which so very much information was lacking.

The compiled listing which accompanies this study report, shows there are over 262 documented burials within this cemetery which cannot be located today. There are 18 burials of unknown persons which are located in unmarked and unknown grave sites. There arc approximatety 290 other probable unmarlred and unknown graves located somewhere in the cemetery in areas which today appear to be virgirL vacant ground. Where any of these missing, unmarked and unknown graves are is anybody's guess. Lakeside Cemetery has no historic records of burials, per their own admission.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
The study report and the compiled listing paint a porFait of an historic cemetery wtrich has been rap€d, mutilated and desecrated by the very authority licensed by the State of California to operate and protect it. Part of ttre responsibility for what has occurred at Iakeside Cemetery also rests on the shoulders of the Board of Supervisors of Sacramento County, and the Folsom City Council.

Each of these two civil authorities have, at different times, been the legal authority for the Citizen's Cemetery in all its progressive configurations.

The private, licensed operators of Lakeside Cemetery do not have any legal title to the old Citizen's Cemetery, nor do they likely have a legal title to what is known as the Cook'VAmerican Irgion Cemetery. I,ee Miller knew this and when he sold Lakeside Cemetery to Robert Claney in 1963, he sold only the New Masonic Cemetery and the Jewish Cemetery, believing he had legal title to that religious ground. The subsequent acquisitions of portions of the original Negro Bar (aka: Citizen's) Cemetery, the Cook's/American Irgion Cemetery, and the 1904 addition (Lots I tluough 3 of Block 44)to the Citizen's Cemetery, werc not legal transactions. o
Further, under the ownership of Robert Claney, much of the cemetery ornamentation which has disappeared was wilfully and maliciously removed by he and his staff. Whatever the motivation or intent of doing so, it apparently was not enough that, under his ownership, Claney had all the lone, historic tombstones laid flat in the ground to crumble away over time, but he obviously was desperate for additional burial space, so that in removing family plot coping he was able to gain access to what he thought were "unused" grave plots.

The fact that the Department of Consumer Affairs, which investigated charges against the cemetery operators in 1996-97, was unable to obtain sufficien! hard evidence (according to our weak and ineffectual cemetery laws) to make felony arrests, does not preclude that felonies were com.mitted at this cemetery. Not just once, but time and time again. And no one - not one resident of the city of Folsom, not one city official, not one law enforcement official - made any effort to stop the desecration which he wrought upon this historic burial ground.

What once may have been one of the most unique, historic, gold rush-er4 pioneer cemeteries to be found in the lower foothills of the Mother Lode, is now just a lawn fi.rll of destroyed and decaying historic tombstones and monuments to the early residents of Negro Bar and the Town of Folsom and vicinity. The evidence of this is contained in the compiled listing with it's source references, and with the photographic evidence, taken over various years, which show a long-ago cemetery that bears no resemblance to the "nice, memorial lawn" disastrously created by Robert Claney and Iakeside Cemetery.

If the State of Califomia will not act to help this pioneer-era burying ground, who may the people trust in another hundred years with the remains of their loved ones or themselves? I think about that a great deal. Perhaps so should you.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002
Page2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o

INTRODUCTION
The City of Folsom, in Sacramento County, was incorporated in 1947. Prior to that this historic Califomia town was first the site of the Negro Bar mining camp from as early as 1849, later becoming the Town of Folsom, as surveyed and platted for Capt. Joseph L. Folsom by Theodore T.

Judah in 1855.

In February 1856, the town of Folsom became the terminus of the Sacramento Valley Railroad, the first railroad in the west. Negto Bar, for the most part still in place until the purchase of the town lots and blocks, was located between the American River and what is now Block 12 of the official plat of the town.l
At all early mining comrnunities, the one sure thing that faced the men who flocked to the gold fields of Califomia, was that death was a part of life. Gold rush-era cemeteries dbt the roadways and byways of California's Mother tode. Some are well known, but some have become lost to the past. The mining camp at Negro Bar, with its surrounding camps of Texas Hill, Alder Creek, Rebel Hill, Ashland" Mississippi Bar and others, would be no exception in the need to find a place to bury the dead.

Studies conducted by the El Dorado County Pioneer Cemeteries Commission, at pioneer-era cemeteries throughout the Mother Lode, reveal that wherever possible, the mine/s cemeteries were established on small hills or knolls. Out of the reach of the miners'pans and sluice boxes along the river banks, these early citizens of the state felt certain they were laying their dead to rest in peace.

Some communities succeeded to that end. Some did not. In 1855 the cemetery at Mormon Island, east of Folsom, was in danger of being sluiced away by three mining companies. It was wriuen that some bodies had already been washed away. [n March of 1856, the editor of The Granite Journal, the first newspaper in Folsom, advised friends and loved ones that they had best see to the removal of their deceased before they were mined away.

In other instances, special Acts of the Califomia State Legislature were passed to approve the relocation of cemeteries. This is known to have occurred at the Bidwell's Bar Cemetery, the Cold Springs Cemetery in El Dorado County, and to a Catholic cemetery in Stockton.

California does, indeed, have an appalling history of its treatment of the resting places of the dead.

In that no records of burials were kept at most" those cemeteries still in use today, which date to the state's earliest times, are known to contain the unmarked remains of the state's pioneers, the graves of which are being impacted by current burials.

At the original Negro Bar Cemetery, now considered a part of Lakeside Cemetery, there is but one tembstone dated 1850. Yet the camp was said to have been populated by up to 700 miners between 1849 and 1851. In the Fall of 1850, Sacramento City experienced a terrible Cholera epidemic I A copy of the townsite map may be found at the Folsom History Museum, the Sacramento County Recorder's Office, and the Sacramento Archives and Museum Collection Center (SAMCC). o
Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
which began in October and did not abate until sometime in Decembef. Over 800 deaths occu'ed in the city alone, and thousands fled to outlying areas. The tombstone dating to the Negro Bar Cemetery is that of one Cholera victim whom the 1850 U.S. Census .n r."it d as a miner at Negro Bar in September of that year. He was Henry Probasco and he died on October 29, 1g50.

His tombstone identifies his enemy - "Died of Cholera"
How many human remains of other early pioneers of this vicinity who died and were buried in this cemetery may never be known for certain. Reviewing studies of other cemeteries of similar size and era', reveals that there are many more marked graves of the earliest era within those cemeteries than there are remaining at Lakeside Cemetery today. Empirical evidence of this tlpe is an indicator that there must be a large number of unmarked and unknown graves within Lakeside Cemetery which may now be being impacted by current burials. Based upon this correlation between towns of similar size and population, the lack of historic tombstones ailakeside is, at best, unnerving,

BACKGROTJND
While researching the history of Folsom, it became necessary to visit the cemeteries tocated in the city. Historic cemeteries are generally filled with old marble and granite tombstones inscribed with various dates and sayings, and they stand prominently within the grounds. At Lakeside Cemetery, the majority of the remaining historic tombstones were found to have been laid flat in ttr" grounJ where they are disintegrating and being destoyed not only from natural elements, but from the abuse of being driven over by lawn mowers and tractors.

Additionally, in 1994, historic tombstones, and remnants of historic tombstones and granite bases, were found hidden in Oleander bushes by qe cemetery's storage sheds. This discovery eventually led to the study of the cemetery from which this document resulted.

During the summer of 1995, there appeared to be an increased number of burials occurring at the cemetery. A check of Disposition Permits filed with the County Office of Vital Statisticsa,lroved ' Mpnronlps. tr4gN ahln MgotcrNE, A History of Medicine in sacramento, califomia with Biographies of the Founders of the Sacramento Society for Medical Improvement and a few Contemporaries; J. Roy Jones, M.D.; The Sacramento Society for Medical Imprwement, 1950; premier Publications, Ltd., Sacramento, Californ ia
Forexample, a study of the 3.19 acre El Dorado Cemetery, in the town of El Dorado in El Dorado Coun$r, indicates the probability of over 500 unmarked graves, yet still it bears many more early markers than Lakeside.

I n permit must be obtained for the interment and "disposition" of all human remains in the State of Califomia. These permits, required by Statc law, are only required to be kept on file in the county,s offices for a period of 12 months. Thereafter, they may be disposed. Sacramento -ounty throws these documents away, and so it is impossible, without the name and date of death of the deceased, to verify interments in any cemetery
Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento CountSr, Califomia
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
o
Page4
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
ttrat Lakeside Cemetery, through Miller Funeral Home, had not obtained as many disposition permits as the number of graves they had opened and closed in the ground that summer.

This discovery lead to the theory that they were perhaps "prospecting" to find vacant ground. And that theory lead to the realization that if they werc seeking open ground and found historic remains, would they dare to remove those remains to cleanse the grave hole for future use? As ugly as this seems, it has happened all over California cemeteries and elsewhere.

A citizen complaint was filed with the State Cemetery Board in August of 1995. That Board, which disbanded in disgrace some thirty days after inspecting the cemetery in September, ruled that no improprieties had occurred at lakeside. Sixty days after the Cemetery Board's duties were relinquished to the Division of Investigation of the Department of Consumer Affairs @CA), the Board's director was under investigation of alleged misuse of trust funds from the Arlington/Bellview Cemetery in Sacramento County.
o
In late January of 1996, after the news of the investigation of the Board's director, a request was made to the director of the Deparfrnent of Consumer Affairs that the departnent re-open the complaint and re-investigate the allegations made therein. In March l996,ameeting was held with the new investigator for DCA which reviewed the facts and allegations of the complaint.

In late October and eady November of 1996, the California Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), in cooperation with the Califomia Department of Parks and Recreation @PR), excavated and removed approximately thirty family plot coping pieces from State park land adjacent to the cemeterys. It is believed they were removed by the cemetery operator -b"t*"rn
1993 and 1995.

Only one name was inscribed on any of the pieces of ornamentation found - KMGIIT6. None of the other omamentation or tombstone bases found were inscribed to enable us to identify from which dismantled family plot it had been removed.

During the course of the excavation many citizens came forward to say they had had suspicions about what was going on at the cemetery. No one wanted to be identified and no one gave much Early El Dorado County "Burial Permits" were retrieved and saved from l9l0 through 1995 (1994 is the only exception) and these documents havs been a tremendous help in the study of that county's pioneer cemeteries and burials. In Sacramento County, one would have to review all the death certificate microfilm rolls at the County Recorders Oflice in'order to obtain much of the information obtained from the burialpermits in El Dorado.
5 Color copies of photographs taken at the time of the excavation accompany this report. Video tape of some of the excavation is also available at the Folsom History Museum upon special request. o This piece of cut granite is believed to have been removed from the family plot of Henry T. Knighg an early tnrstee of the Natoma Water & Mining Company, and later the superintendent of the Folsom Water Power Company. His grave is located within tlre "Cook'slAmerican Lrgion Cemetery" near the graves of many of the people with whom he was inter-related. The grave of his brother, Nathaniel Knighg is believed to be located near Henqy's and is without marker today, unless his name may be found on the underside of Henry's marker which has now been laid flat in the ground.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
detail by way of particulars. Except that is, the former caretaker of the cemetery, who spoke with one of the investigators while in his car in the parking lot. It is not known if the investigator included in his reports what he was told by the former caretaker that day, but it is known ttrat nCa never followed up in discussions with him throughout the remainder of the investigation. What he had to say was pivotal to the investigation and would have enabled DCA to file criminal charges against the operators.

To the date of this report, no charges have been filed by either DCA for this illegal removal of these items from the cemetery, or by DPR for the dumping of them onto state lands. The owner/operator of the cemetery sold the cemetery and his mortuary to a large corporation within 8 months of this investigative excavation. The cemetery continues to be used with present interments occuning within the most historic sectors of the graveyard - those representing the burial grounds dating to I 850, 1860 and 1870. In all likelihood, historic graves are either being buried over or, very likety, those hurnan rdmains were removed by the former operator.

This document is being published so that sometime, somewhere in the future, there will be a record of what has occuned at this cemetery. Those in search of their family histories, those who plan to inter their deceased loved ones at this cemetery in the future, ne4 to know that this cemetery, as of this date, is estimated to contain 575 unmarked and unknown gave sites. [n more specific terrns, this number of graves represents 12,075 squzue feet of ground if buried side-by-side and end-to-end.

It totals roughly l/4 of an acre of land or more if they were all buried in the same location.

What appears as "open space" within the lawn section of this cemetery, does not mean that there are no gnves in the ground. Photographs taken in 1889, 1908 and in the 1940's and 1960's bear this out/, showing wooden headboards and other markers in areas now visible as vacant areas. Fires, which are documented to have swept through the cemetery, also took their toll on the wooden markers. The family plots containing the graves of members of numerous families which have been documented to be buried here, can no longer be found. Some of the marken which have been Iaid flat in the ground are believed to contain additional names of deceased on the unexposed sides of the monuments.

HISTORY OF CEMETERY SECTIONS
Lakeside Cemetery, is a combination of five historic burial grounds (Masonic, Odd Fellows, Jewish, Nego Bar [aka: Citizens'] and Cook's, and New Masonic), and has been actively used from as early as 1849 with the emergence of the mining camp called Negro Bar. t Early photographs may be found at the Folsom History Museum and at the Sacramento Archive and Museum Collection Center (SAMCC) in the Hepting Collection (photos by Thomas BeE and Len Kidder, 1940's).
o
l-akeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Deccmeber 6, 2M2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
Negro BarCemetery
Of the various and separate sections, the Negro Bar Cemeterys was the first location to be used. It was comprised of Lots 4 through 8 of Block 44 (Figure l.). These lots were sold at the auction of the town lots and blocks in Sacramento City in 1856e. According to church records and the newspaper obituaries, these lots would later be referred to as the Folsom cemetery, the City Cemetery, and the Citizen's cemetery, from as early as 186l until at least lg4zto.

According to Califomia law, the "Citizen's Cemetery" was a public cemetery. That is to say, that in 1872, under Political code section 3105, title to this cemetery vested to the County of Sacramento by benefit of the provisions ofthe statute, which stated title to a cemetery, then in continuous use by the community for a period of five years, vested to the community. If not located within an incorporated city, authority for the cemetery would fall to the county in which the cemetery was situatedll.

Section 3105 further provided that once used as a public cemetery those lands could never be used for any other purpose whatsoever. Therefore, Lakeside Cemeteqy's claim of ownership of these lots is invalid, since title vested to Sacramento County in 1872, and they could never be used as anything but a public cemetery. Lakeside Cemetery is a licensed, private cemetery, operating an historic public cemetery outside the provisions of State law.

Lots I through 3 of Block 44 were owned by Joseph McDonald and his wife, Mary, during ttre 1860's. McDonald was killed in a railroad accident in December of 1867. According to his probate records, his properly adjacent to the public cemetery, was never sold frorn the estate. This was probably because the "Citizen's Cemeteryu had already encroached onto the lots owned by McDonal4 and they were, therefore, not an athactive purchase for any buyer.

Graves within Lots I through 3, formerly belonging to McDonald, are known to have occurred as early as the 1920's. According to the County Tax Assessor's records, ttrese lots were transferred to t The Negro Bar Cemetery was originally located on Lots 4 through 8 of Block 44. It was later refened to as the Citizen's Cemetery contained within only those lots. It appears that sometime after 1880, what is now called "Cook's" or "American Legion" Cemetery (Lots l4 through l6 of Block 44), was also refened to as the Citizen's Cemetery. Sometime after the turn of the century, and well into the 1940's, Lots I through 3 of Block 44, also became a known as a part of the Citizen's Cemetery. e No evidence has been found that the original purchaser ever transferred his title to the lots at anyime thereafter.
r0 The TrinityChurch records list a burial in the "Folsom Cemetery" in 1861. This would have been pre-vious to the purchase of the Jewish cemetery lots in late I 861 , and a year earlier than the purchase of the Odd Fellows and Masonic cemeteries in 1862. The Folsom Telegraph first advises of a burial in the "Citizen's cemetery" in 1887, and it continued to use that name as late as 1942, Previous to 1887, the paper referred to it only as "the grave yard."
f t This per Political Code section 3109 of the California statutes enacted in 1872.

I-akeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
ed and Written by Sue Silver
o
PageT
Researched, Compil
Updated: D*emeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
the State of Califomia in 1935, presumably for back properly ta(es. [akeside Cemetery zupposedly purchased these (already) used burial parcels from the Sacramentg County Tax Collector in 1976.

Ye! according to the former caretaker of [akeside Cemetery in a 1992 audioaped, tour given to members of the Folsom Historical Society, Lee Miller supposedly "op€ned" this area up for interments in the mid-1960's.

The sale of these lots by the County Tax Collector was not lawful in that the grounds had been used by the public as a public cemetery from at least the 1920's. Again, according to State law, once it had been used as a cemetery by the public, it became a public cemetery never to be used for any other purpose whatever. How this property carne to be sold for taxes when cemeteries have been exempted from property taxation since 1859, is not known. What is known" upon review of the state's laws, is that these lots are public properly which are being unlavvfully operated as private cemetery grounds.

Cook's/American Legion Cemetery
Cook's Cemetery Gots 14-16, Block 44) (Figure 2.) has been historically known by several references. [t is believed it was first called Murray's Cemetery for William Murray who died in 1870. It was later called Meredith's Cemetery for James S. Meredith whose daughter taura Belle was supposed to have been intened in the Masonic Cemetery and whose grave somehow was placed in Murray's Cemetery. Later it was referred to as the Blower Cemetery for David Blower, the husband of Maggie Cook Blower and brother-inJaw of Frank Cook, for whom it was later called Cook's Cemetery. Shortly after World War I, Frank Cook (purportedly) deeded the cemetery over to the kwis J. Blodgett American kgion Post, and it became known as the American Legion Cemetery.l2
Similar to the Citizen's Cemetery, this too is a public cemetery under the law. When William Murray died in 1870 and was buried in his "own cemetery," the ground began to be actively used by the community. No transfer of Munay's title has been located to date, though the county tax assessor does list James S. Meredith as owning an undivided.l/2 interest in the lots in 1873, one year after the enactnent of the law which vested title to the public. It is likely the assessor listed Meredith since Meredith's daughtet's grave is located within Lot 14. And, despite the Cook's claim of title to this cdmetery, no deed has been located to prove the Cook family ever held legal title to the lots.

SPECIAL NOTE: RegardingCook's, Citizen's, I'Cib"r and "Folsom" Cemetery References t2 FN dated 2/22/1999: The following newspaper article was located after the original writing of this report:
"I-ewis J. Blodget Post wishes to announce the transfer of Cook's Cemetery to the Post. The cemetery will now be known as l,ewis J.

Blodget Memorial Cemetery and any person owning plots wishing to make changes, please consult Anthony Castro, serviee officer of the Post." (Folsom Telegraph, 5 1261 1939, l -3.\
o
Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
This research has revealed that Lots 14 to 16 of Block 44, commonly referred to as Cook's/American Irgion Cemetery, was also referred to as the Citizen's Cemetery, City Cemetery and Folsom Cemetery based upon the finding of tombstones of deceased of w?rom these various cemeteries were noted in obituary references.

This will create a great deal of confision in determining the location of unmarked graves for they could all be anyrruhere within Lots I to 8 and 14 to 16 of Block 44. Because of these references, it is suspected that the residents of the area used Lots 14 to 16 of Block44 atwill, just as they did the Citizen's Cemetery. There was never any advertisement for plot sales found in the newspapers which would indicate that Munay, Meredith, Blower, or Cook ever really administered this cemetery. It is suspected that the community viewed iL and used it, as a public cemetery, just as they did with Citizen's Cemetery.

Citizen's Cemetery has been found to be referenced altemately over time as Citizen's, City or Folsom Cemetery. Because this was the public cemetery, during various points in time, the residents referred to it by the name used within that specific period of time.

The use ofthe term "City Cemetery" is especially confirsing because the Sacramento City Cemetery is so heavily identified within the county. Almost always, in researching cemeteries located withi; townsites, this term arises periodically. This has been found in places such as Diamond Springs and Placerville in El Dorado County. The people who lived in the towns (versus an incorporated city) still referred to their locales as a "city" and their cemeteries were, naturally, "City. cemeteries.

Jewish Cemetery
The Jewish Cemetery, originally lots 13 through 16 of Block a3 @igure 3.), was purchased by Jewish merchant Joseph Fiel, in late 1861. Title to the property was later held in the name of E.R. kvy, and finally rested in the hands of Simon Cohn. The title to these lots was never tansferred from Cohn's estate, and his estate documents officially established it as the "Folsom Jewish Cemetery" and not as the "Cohn Family Jewish Cemetery" as it would have to have been called if the grounds belonged to the family personally.

Title to the Jewish Cemetery was held in these individual's names probably because the Hebrew Benevolent Society, established at Folsom in 1857, had formally disbanded by the time the property was purchased. Fiel was a cousin through marriage of E.R. Levy, and it would have been understandable for Levy to take title in trust for the Jewish residents of Folsom after Fiel,s death.

Cohn was one of the most prominent Jewish men in Folsom, and it would also be understandable for him to assume title in tust after lrrry.''
13 A chain of title to tocate the transfer of this property has not been performe.d. This information has been taken from the County Tax Assessor's map book information. It is not yet known if the deed formally passed from Fiel to Levy, or from lrvy to Cohn.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
o

Researohed,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
In spite of the fact that title to the Folsom Jewish Cemetery never legally passed from Simon Cohn's estate to any individual or goup of individuals, the descendants of Cohn quit claimed tnts 13 and 14 to lakeside Cemetery in the 1960's, when Lakeside was then under the ownership of 6e Millerla. That (illegal) quit claim deed, however, conditioned the transaction to the maintenance of a fence and road to segregate the Jewish cemetery ground from the cemeteries of the gentiles. The fence and roadway have both been removed since the execution of that deed.

Odd Fellows and Masonic Cemeteries
The Granite Lodge No. 62 of the Independent Order of Odd Fellows (OOF) and the Natoma Lodge No. 64 of the Free and Accepted Masons (Masons), co-jointly purchased lots 9 through 13 of Block 44 in 1862. The property was divided so that the Odd Fellows would use lots 9 through I I for their cemetery and the Masons would use lots t2 and 13 for their organization's cemetery. The IOOF and the Masons each sold their cemeteries to Lakeside Cemetery in 1969 md lgTl,respectively.

Interestingly, since Lots 4 through 8 of Block 44had been identified to be a "Public Cemetery" by the County Tax Assessor as early as 1873, by lgll or 1912, the assessor's records reflected that these lots belonged to the Odd Fellows. When or how the Odd Fellows may have laid claim to the public cemetery is not known. Neverttreless, when they sold their burial grounds to Lakeside Cemetery in 1969, these four previously identified public cemetery lots were included in the deed.rs o

HISTORY OF FUNERAL HOME OPERATORS
In order to understand who was handling the burials within the cemetery tluoughout time, a review of the undertakers of Folsom is necessary. [n the first few years of the Negro Bar mining camp, of course? we can assume that the miners took care of the burial of their associates and friends.

Generally speaking, this would entail wrapping the body in a blanket and depositing it into the ground. Lumber was scarce, there were few sawmills in operation in the beginning, and the cost of wood for a coffin was prohibitive. They would have much rather spent money on lumber for building sluice boxes and long toms to aid in their mining operations. [ater, of course, as the cost of wood and lumber came down, the dead were buried in common pine boxes. The more affluent l'r Lakeside at that time was comprised of onty the New Masonic Cemetery tocated on what was supposed to be L,ots 15 and 15 of Block 43, but which, in reality, was located within the 66 feet of Sacramento Street with only 44 feet of Block 16 being taken for actual use. It would appear that the residents, the Masons, and the Cohn Family (P.C. and Alice Cohn and Rosa (nee Cohn) and Nathan Kohn), forgot that Ore cemetery parcels were laid out on the original lots and blocks, containing streets and alleys separating them, at the time the Masons obained the ground for the New Masonic Cemetery fiom the Cohn heirs.
ri Since title to tnts 4 through 8 of Block 44 vested to Sacramento County with the enactment of Political Code section 3105 of the California statutes, the transfer of this pubtic cemetery to private ownership was unlawfi:!. The Odd Fellows, having no true title to them, could not have legally sold them to Lakeside Cemetery.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Page l0
Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 5, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
the deceased was the more likelihood his coffin would have metal handles. The less influential person's coffin probably had rope handles.

As communities developcd over time, it is seen by advertisements in the newspapen that undertaking was only a side business to one that brought a regular clientele. In Folsom, William Murray appears to be the first merchant to supply coftins and undertaking services. His furniture house advertisement found in the Folsom Telegraph of October 2, l862,ias dated August lg6l.

The advertisement, however, touted his furniture business, and said nothing of the furnistring of coffins or undertaking services.

In May of 1869, Munay sold his business to Jacob Miller of Sacramento. Miller's first advertisement included, .(P.S. Undertaker and hearse furnished at reasonable rates.),' Miller's "Furniture House" was fint located in the building on Sutter Street which was built by Murray and which still stands on the south side of Sutter Street between Riley and Wool streets bearin! the name "MIJRRAY" on its edifice.

Thereafter, Jacob Miller attended the needs of the dead, providing both coffins and caskets and funeral senrices as well. He often served as the coroner for the eastem boundary of the county and was responsible for the burial of the unknown or indigent deceased in the vicinity. By the turn of the century, Miller's son Oscar, had gone to undertaking school (a trade his father is not known to have formally studied) and was active in the family business. Jacob died in 1905, Ieaving the business to his son, Oscar.

Oscar Mller continued the business until sometime in the early 1940's, at which time his son, Leland (ke), also hained in the field of undertaking and embalming had alreadyjoined the family enterprise. By this time, the only business being conducted by the Miller f"-itt was the fineral home. Oscar died in 1946, Ieaving the business to his son fue and his wife, Elizabeth. Elizabeth died in 1954, leaving the business to Lee.

Approximately two years later, Lee saw the fufure in owning his own cemetery. Folsom Dam and Lake had recently been completed and the future of Folsom probably seemed brighter than it had in years. A recreational lake near the City of Folsom would draw new "settlers" to the area. Aerojet General was in operation and brought many new residents to the town. The cemeteries of the town were less than well kept, and Lee could see that it would need to be regularly attended and maintained.

This is when he obtained the New Masonic Lawn from the Natoma Lndge No. 64, which was struggling under financial conshaints to maintain both its new and old cemetery sertions. The tansfer of ownership was made and Lee Miller formed Lakeside Memorial Lawn. Shortly thereafter, through his long association with Folsom Prison and his conhact to undertake thl deceased convicts, Lee persuaded a close associate and relative of the Cohn family to relinquish the Jewish Cemetery so that he could "better maintain it.', After much discussion, the family relented and quit claimed what they may have thought was their interest in the two lots comprising the Folsom Jewish Cemetery to Lee Miller. Uiller, in turn, Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, Cal iforn ia
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
o
Page I I
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

I o
incorporated the two lots into lakeside Memorial Lawn, removed plot coping and omamentation, and began to inter gentiles in the previously sacred, Jewish burial ground.

Miller sold Lakeside and the funeral home to Robert Claney, a long-time employee, in 1963.

Thereafter, Claney proceeded to "upgrade" the cemetery to bring it more into conformance with the concept of the modem, "mernorial lawn burial park." He bought the historic Odd Fellows Cemetery (unlauftlly including Lots 4 tluough 8 of the public Citizen's Cemetery), and followed this purchase with obtaining the old, historic Masonic Cemetery.l6 As part of Claney's program to enhance the cemetery grounds, he began to lay the historic tombstone and monuments in the ground supposedly for ease of maintenance. Later, this appears not to have been enough to modernize the grounds, and he appean to have removed tons of granite, placerite and formed concrete coping pieces from inalienable family plots. In doing so, he was able to remove the original boundary lines of family burying space and was then able to utilize whatever "open" space seemed available. According to the former caretaker of 22 years employmen! he ;:ffinl"%:tffl;ll,1f#;Y,,H1','o" unsightrv prot outrinings and copingrT' as werr as Robet Claney transfened ownership of the funeral home and cemetery to his son, Loren" and his daughter in early to mid-1995. It was under the ownership of his offspring th,at the Department of Consumer Affairs investigation began, and which continued until both the cemetery and filreral home were sold in mid-1997 to SCI, Inc., a conglomerate corporation specializing in the funeral and cemetery industries.

For the first time since 1869, Miller Funeral Home is no longer run as a family enterprise. Since taking ownership of Lakeside Cemetery, SCI has increased the number of interments within the '6 The Masons built a new hall for their organization around 1870. It soon, thereafter, was a victim of fire and was burned to the ground. All of the association's records and documents were los! inctuding t6e record of deaths and burials at their cemetery. The first documented burial in the Masonic Cemetery-was that of Capt. A.M. Hammond who was murdered at Smith's Fla! El Dorado County, and was brought to FolsomandburiedbytheNatomaLodgeof Masons.[MountainDemocra!April 13, 186l,pg. l,col. t; Sacramento Daily Union, April 12, 1861, pg. 3, col.2]. Therefore, the Masons had used their cemetery even before the formal purchase in 1852. By 1871, with the loss of the records by fire, any numberof interments could have been made in the cemetery. There appears to have been no attempt by the Lodge to recreate their records in those early years.'
It Photographs on file at the Fotsom History Museum show many "unsightly" grave sites situated at the rear (north) of the cemetery. One photo is believed to have been taken viewing east from the Jewish Cemetery and shows crude brick outlined plots and wooden markers. 18 Most of what the caretaker rernoved is located in an old ravine situated at approximately the north end of what was Sacramento Street (New Masonic Cemetery section) and extends easterty behind the Negro Bar (aka: Citizen's) Cemetery section. Since mid-1995, Lakeside maintenance workers have been filling in this ravine to conceal the materials hidden there. (Also found in this ravine in January of 1995, were pieces of granite coping.)
lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Compiled and Written by Sue Silver

Researched"
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
historic sections of the cemetery grounds, even though the records of interments which they received from the Claney family is known not to be accurate or anywhere near complete.

INTERMENT AND IDENTIFICATION LISTING (not included in t2/6/2002 update) The attached listing was compiled using tombstone inventory lists previously published such as a 1935 Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) list and Rest in Peace 1ie3t, Bayless, et al.).

Death notices, obihraries and articles about deaths taken from the Folsom Teiegraph (1865 - 1943\, Mountain Democrat (1855-1905, 19lt-1913) and Sacramento Daily union irgSZ-rgog'dj newspapers were abstracted from microfilm copies on file at the state Library.

The records of St. John the Baptist Catholic Church and Trinity Church were reviewed, as were EI Dorado County Burial Permits. Abstracts of death certificates from Sacramento County deaths2o, a record of the Deaths and Interments ln and From the City of-sacramento (provided by tire Sacramento City Cemetery Archives), the New Masonic Cemetef I plot Sales rJcords, and other miscellaneous documents derived from various other sources, have also been reviewed for this research.

Where necessary to identifr familial relationships, the U.S. Census indexes and records for 1g60, 1870 and 1880 have been referenced. A more complete record of families from census information would provide additional information for this study, as would the creation of genealogical family group records.

METHOD OF COMPILATION
The 1935 and 1981 tombstone inventory lists were first been combined alphabetically and, when obituary information has been available about these persons, it has been referenced and added.

Newspaper source reference citations provide the newspaper title, the issue date, and the page and column numbers of where the reference was found.

Where the names from obituaries did not appear in the previously published listings, the information contained in the abstracted obifuaries have been added to the list us separate entries.

Sorne of these entries cite specific locations of interment as stated in the obituary notice, such a.s le As research continues, additional abstracts may be taken from later issues of the Sacramento Union. ^
tl
.at alstracted by Dennis McCargar (1996-1998), Librarian at the California State prison, Sacramento, for his study of the historic Folsom Prison Cemetery.
2t The New Masonic Cemetery purchased in 1916, but was not platted until 1924. A copy of the plat map was filed with the Sacramento County Recorder. A copy of the map, with some of the names associated with the grave plots is available through the Lodge Historian. nre iiot sates register is archived at the Folsom History Museum.

I-akeside Cemetery
Folsonr5 Sacramento County, Cal ifornia
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver

Updated: Decemeber 6, ZO02

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Citizen's, Cook's, Masonic, etc. The names provided by the obituary information ttrat cite the location of burial and which cannot today be located at l-akeside, are indicative of the number of known and unmarked graver which exist at Lakeside Cemetery today.

Other entries represent those who died at or near Folsom and surrounding communities. These rulmes have been added and are considered probable burials within one ofthe cemeteries at Folsonr, other than St' John the Baptist Catholic Cemetery. Tombstone inventories for all known cemeteries of the area, have been referenced in order to eliminate the possibility of these burials having occurred elsewhere. The remains of the persons identified from these references, should be considered to probably be in unmarked and unknown graves.

The earliest marker (remaining) at Lakeside is dated 1850. Folsom Telegraph obituary information is not available on Folsom burials previous to 1865 as there are no copies available foi referencing.

AdditionallS a total of 327 issues of the Telegraph are missing between the years 1865 and lggg.

There is a great deal of information about Folsom burials which may never been known. From 1850 to 1865, and including the327 missing issues, a total of 2l years of obituary information has not been recorded.

To supplement some of the missing Telegraph information, the Sacramento Transcript and the Sacramento Daily Union were referenced for the period of 1850 to 186822. Still, it would be an intelligent presumption to believe that there are far more unmarked graves located within these historic cemetery sections than is reflected in this listing.

The previously unrecorded names on the list do not include names determined to have been buried at the Catholic, Eagles, Knights of Pythias, Mormon Island or Matthew Kilgore cemeteries, all of which are the closest burials places to Folsom. All names which may have had the appearance of being Irish, or closely related to other known Catholic recognized surnames (such-as French, Portuguese, German, etc.), have not been included on this listing. However, it is recognized that not all Irish sumames are representative of the Catholic religion, though it would be diflicult to differentiate between Irish Catholics and lrish Protestant names. There are a vast number of deaths of persons with hish surnames which have been recorded in my previous research, but which have not been included in this study.23
It is important to note that there were no "Unknown" graves recorded in either the 1935 or l98l listings, nor were there estimates given of the number of unknown grav€s visible at those times.

There are also no wooden headboards or cornmon stone markers such as are found in nearly all pioneer cemeteries in zunounding communities. More telling is the lack of temporary metal 22 While it is entirely possible that additional editions of the Sacramento newspapers will yield firnher death and obituary information not found in the Folsom Telegraph editions, they havi not at this time been referenced or abshacted.
-
23 Refer to the report and study for the Historic St. John the Baptist Catholic Cemetery for abstracted deaths associated with suspected Catholic parishioners. It is possibte that some of those included on St.

John's listing were not catholics and were buried at what is now Lakeside.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2A02

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
markers an) ilhere within the grounds. This is highly unusual, for many other pioneer cemeteries ggntain these temporary markers even though the name and death information has long since disappeared from the face plate.

It should be noted that addendum listings have been produced from the main listing for names of deceased known to be intened in a specific cemetery (by reference), so that ttrere is a separate listing for unmarked/unknown graves within Citizen's Cemetery, Cook's Cemetery, OId Masonic, and Odd Fellows cemeteries. No attempt has been made to identiff interments within the New Masonic Cemetery, with the exception of including the Masonic Association's plot sales records.

LISTING LEGEITiD:

A first listing which was compiled in 1995, and included color coding with a legend that identified what each colored entry represented in terms of possible interments, previously recorded tombstones no longer found in the cemetery, interments from obituaries which cited specific locations but for which no tombstones were located tombstones dated 1900 and prior, tombstones located and found on previous inventories, etc. This was found to be too confirsing to follow in a listing of this size. (The original listing and all updated listings have been archived for back referencing.)
The new legend has been designed for simplicity.

Bolded entries now represent known interments based on the recordation from previous tombstone listings or from obituary information found in newspaper accounts which cite an actual location of burial (ie. Citizens, Cook's, etc.)
Underlinei enties now represent probable or possible interments. In cemetery studies conducted in El Dorado County over the last 20 months (from the date of this printingl, it tras been found tlrat wtrere one died and there was a cemetery, one was buried in that local cemetery. If one was taken to another community for burial, the newspaper would almost always provide that information.

Transporting the deceased to another locale was an unusual occtrrence, especially in the earliest years, and we must therefore presume that those who died in and near Folsom were probably buried in the Folsom cemeteries.

TIIE I,NKNOWN, UIYII{ARKED AND MISSING GRAVES
In reviewing the compiled listing, it is clear to see that many of the burials which occured at the Folsom cemeteries are now either unknown, unmarked or missing when compared with the previous tombstone listings and references cited. Of those who cannot be located within the grounds today are many family groups, as well as individuals who died and were buried here.

Only one grave representing Folsom's African American residents is marked in the cemetery and that is the grave of James H. "Honey" Cook. All ofthe other graves of African Americans noi"d to Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, Californ ia
led and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, ZCfl2
Page l5
Researched, Compi

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
be bwied or suspected of being buried at this cemetery, are unmarked. Odd that at a cemetery which was first used by the "Negro" Bar mining carnp, that none of the pioneer citizens of that race are able to be located in this cemetery.

It is estimated that between 20 and 30 family plots of coping materials were removed in 1996 from the State park land adjacent to the cemetery. With the "dismantling" of the family plots and the plot coping, a cemetery operator may seek to take advantage of "unused" plots within legally inalienable plot space. The motivation for removal of the early family plots may also have beein to "re-use" grave sites for current burials, since in digging the new graves, only the equipment operator would know whether an old grave pre-existed.

Regardless of the motivation, one fact remains - there are a great number of old, historic graves which are unmarked within the cemetery which have already been, or are in jeopardy of being, buried over through current burials. This is not only illegal, but immoral. A society, upon discovering such activity, which would allow such activity to continue, evidences itself as having the most frayed of moral fabric. If we cannot protect the dead, those who lie in sacred peace, who can?
The following 6l family plots or grave sites have been identified as either missing, significantly altered by dismantling, or as being in jeopardy:

Adolph Alexander Famil], Plot I unmarked
The brother-in-law of Simon Cohn, Alexander's tombstone stands to the northwest of the Simon Cohn grave site in the Jewish Cemetery. In Febnrary of 1867, Alexandeds daughter, Esther, died at the age of 18 months. Her grave cannot be located today. It is not known whether Mrs. Bertha Alexander, Adolph's wife, was buried here.

David Bennett Plot 2 unmarked
Update, 5ll/1998: According to Karen Rader (see Tyler J. Hill Plot), David Bennett was the second husband of Mrs. Lucy Ann Saunders, Marion Caroline Saunders Hill's mother. Both were buried in the Folsom Masonic cemetery. David Bennett was a pioneer of El Dorado County and was an early vintner of the area just east of Marble Valley in the vicinity of present day Cameron Park. During his ownership of that ranch, Bennett would have been a contemporary of Benjamin N. Bugbey of the Natoma Vineyard near Mormon Island east of Folsom. Bugbey also had vineyard land near Bennett's vineyard offof present day Durock [sic Duroc] Road in Cameron Park.

Charles Bishop Familv Plot 3 unmarked
Two of the children of Charles and Sarah C. Bishop were buried in Folsom. According to Trinity Church records, daughter Edith, who died in January of 1868, and son Freddie, who died in September of 1868, were buried in the Odd Fellows Cemetery. Charles Bishop died in July 1876 o
Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated; Decemcber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
and was brought to Folsom for burial. His interment would have been made with the graves of his deceased children in the Odd Fellows Cemetery.

Peter Bush Familv Plot I unmarked
located within what is now called the Cook's/American Legion Cemetery section, is a granite coped plot with the name UBUSH' chiseled into the front facing of the step which leads into the plot. lntened within this plot are members of the Fleckenstein family, who arrived in Folsom much later than Peter Bush, who died in February of 1889. According to the 1880 U.S. Census index, Bush, a 50 year old native of Germany, had a wife and five children. Only Pete/s death notice has been located. His grave is unmarked at the cemetery today and his plot has been alienated2a by the interment of the Fleckenstein family members.

Campbell Family plot 4 unmarked
There is no evidence of the graves of the four members of this early African American family who are known to have been intened at this cemetery. The first of the family to die was Amelia Campbell, the 16 year old daughter of Squire Campbell, who died in August of 1895. The next member was Toy Campbell, the daughter of Squire Campbell, and the sister of "Sandford" Campbell, who died in February of 1904 and was buried in the "Citizen's Cemetery,,.2s In March of 1907 came the death of little Sanford Edward Campbell, the seven month old son of Yt. *d tv[p. Squire Campbell, who died March ll, 1907, his "interment being in the Citizen's Cemetery."'o Sanford Campbell, the 33 year old son of Squire Campbell of pkcerville, died at Sacramento in June of l9ll, and the obituary stated the "funeral takes place in Citizen's Cemetery."27 He was the brother of Toy Campbeli.

None of the Campbell family membey's graves are marked in the cemetery today. Whether, being African Americans, they may not have any grave markers originally, is not known. Squiri Campbell died in El Dorado County and was buried in the Placenrille City Cemetery.

Michael Can Familv plot
No graves are believed to be unmarked or missing from this plog if the plot is, indeed, where the marker is found today. However, the three names of the Can family *"1nlrrr, father Michael (died to California Health and Safety Codes clearty state that famity burial ptots purchased and used by at least one memberof the family are inalienable and may not be used or sotd byany other parties. 2t Fotsom Telegraph, March 3, 1900, page 3, column l.
2t Folsom Tetegraph, March 16,lg0'l,page 3, column l.
2t Folsom Tetegraph, June 23, l9l l, page I, column 7.

Iakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Saeramento County, Califomia
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver

Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
a o
1863)' mother Ursula (died 1858), and daughter Mary Jane (died 1857), are all inscribed on the same marble tombstone- That tombstone sits adjacent to a tee and is iiroroughly surrounded by more recent markersn many of which may be cremains burials. Regardless of tte type of the morl recent burials, the family plot became inalienable under CalifomiJlaw. Whetherihe Carr graves are situated in this location is not really known as the marker could. have been relocated from somewhere else in the cemetery. It must be noted" however, that in 1857 when Mary Jane died, there was but one cemetery, besides the Catholic cemetery, in use by the residents of Folsom and licinity - the Negro Bar (aka: Citizen's) Cernetery. The iombstone is within what was called the Citizen's Cemetery.

Simon Cohn Family plot I unmarked
The descendants of Simon Cohn, upon transfening the Jewish Cemetery to Lee Miller for use as Lakeside Cemetery.floPd:. relyclXttlr .qralted [aiu., permission to remove the coping and omamentation from the family plot". Miller had stated it would be easier to maintain the griunds if these items were removed. Since that time, the grave marker for Henrietta Cohn can no longer be found. (According to Henrietta Cohn Whelan, daughter of Philip C. Cohn, the family is curious as !o wiat happened to this tombstone.) Included in the Cohn family plot is tft" gruu" of Senator Philip C. Cohn, the only Folsom resident in the 20th century to serve thl state in thi't capacrty.

James M. Cook Familv plot I unmarked
This man, one of Folsom's African American residents, also known as "Honey Cook,,, is buried in the southerly end of Lnt I of Block 44, under a concrete topped grave with a military marker which has been laid flat and embedded in the concrete. This reseaich revealed that Cook was hospitalized at the Veteran's Hospital in Boise, Idalro in 1942. It has not been identified when his death occurred. Cook's wife, Juli4 who he once attempted to kill while living in Folsom, died in Folsom in 1936. Her grave is unmarked and is believed to be next to or near that of her fru.U*atr.-- William Cook Family plO! 2 unmarked
A large granite monument stands prominent within the william cook family plot located in what is known as the Cook's/American Legion Cemetery section. The only name which appears on the monument is that of Ellen Cook, wife of William, who died in January of 1875. Of tfrut family, William, the father and William 8., the son, both died and were buried at Folsom. The senior Mr. cook's obituary from June of 1905, states that he was buried in cook's c"rnJ#o. son, william " See description of the Cohn plot ornamentation and coping under Simon Cohn in the tisting. 2e This is not the only missing grave of an Afiican American resident buried at l-akeside Cemetery. 30 It should be noted that william and Ellen cook's daughter, Maggie, married David Blower. Blower,s name appears on the County Tax Assessol's laps as being the owner of lnts t + ttrroug t 6 of Block 44 sometime in the 1890's' Maggie's brother, Frank W. Cook, is the man from which the name,,Cook,s,, cemetery originated. [.akeside Cemetery led and Written by Sue Silver Folsom, Sacramento County, California

Researched, Compi
Updated: Decemeber 6, ZOO2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
a o
F:.** killed trying to board a moving hain in Stockton in September of 1901. Both men are believed to be in unmarked graves withinthe william cook familyplot.

B.W CorneJl Family plot l-2 unmarked
The name uBrob. W- Comell" is found on the 1935 DAR tombstone listing. Research which located the 1906 obituary of Mrs. A.M. Cornell revealed that she was the wiL of B.W. Comell, they having come to Califomia in 1854. The couple is listed in the lg60 U.S. Census. There were no children living with them at the time.. Mn. Comell's grave is not marked today. It has not yet been ascertained whether Mr. Cornell's grave remains marked as it was in 1935. [SS note, 5/lll20A2: on PeterKroffs 1999 inventory.l Jesse Couch Family plot 3 unmarked
only the tombstone of little Margaret Jane couch, who died in April of lg6l, at the age of g months, can be located at Lakeside todav. Couch's wife, Margaret, and two other children also died while he lived in the area3l. The grarres of wife Margareg ron-B.S. Love, and daughter, Jessie Jane, are not found. The area sunounding baby MargaretJane's grave has been extensiiety used in later times' Jesse Couch once served as the county supervisor of the district in which Granite Township was located.
l unmarked
As featured in the book Folsom Fables - Pieces gf the Past (Sue Silver, 1995), in the story titled ,,A widowed 'woman," the graves of the first two h*br"ds "f Mary Tucl nigrii-.y", crauford, are located in the odd Fellows cemetery, just east of the Linle Famiiy plot. simuel tu"t, Mary,s first husband' died in March of 1867 and she provided him wiflr a beautiful marble tombstone in the odd Fellows Cemetery. In october of 1889, Mary buried her second husband, Hen y Rightneyer, a woodchopper for the railroad company. She had Henry's name and dates inscribed into the same tombstone as Samuel's, and the two men n9w lay sioe by side in ttte cernetery. -il;ffi];
February of 1898. Her obituary states that she was buried-in the Odd Fellows 6emetery, though there is no marker there today. She is believed to be buried next to her first two husbands, A date of death or burial location for her third husband, Alphonse Crawford, ir unk";*n."-" E.L. Currier Familv plot 3 unmarked
Located toward the rear of the cook's/American kgion cemetery section, is the tombstone of Addie S' Cunier, wtro died in May of 1880. The tomSstone has been laid flat in the ground and is il the tlupe of an upright obelisk. A photograph taken of the windmiller r"*ily pf"t around lgg9, shows this tombstone standing erect, behind and to the northwest of the windmiller plot. The 3l Jesse couch wasi one of Folsom's earliest pioneer residents. For a time, however, he did live at Iatrobe, El Dorado county, after the extension of the railroad to that town. In his tife in ihe are4 couch once served as a Supervisor for Sacramento County.

I-akeside Cemetery led and Written by Sue Silver Folsom, Sacrarnento County, California

Researched, Compi
Updated: Decemeber 6, ZAO}

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
grave plot is surrounded by picket fencing and is estimated to have been approximately 20 l0 feet by feet in size.

E'L' cunier, the patriarch of the family, is known to have been a produce grcwer who was quite admired in Folsom. He is believed to have died between February t-ggz ana February of 1g92. The last mention of him in thc,newspaper appeared in the former month and year and the latter occurred at the time his wife, Arvilla died a widow in I892. Ttreir son, Ralph currier, sometimes referred to as "Pet" in newspaper references, died in May of tg:o and iis "inierment **i"'1r" familyplot in cook's cemetery !?t"."" Ralph served- as the agri."lt"*r commissioner for the Granite Township district of sacramento county in the earry 20il century.

Today there are markers for many people who are unrelated to this family on every side of Addie,s members33,
tombstone' It is not known if these later graves were buried gver ttle ,r-rrd currier family or if these later markers were simply moved to ttris location. at"* many are dated 1il,:-r$":tfainder of Ralph's lifetime, it is'certain that io buriats o..u.,"dln the famity ptot George Custer Family plot 2 unmarked
The graves of George and Annie custer cannot be located at r^akeside cemetery. George died in 1895, a native of Pennsylvania and a 40 yelr. resident of the area. wife, Annie, died in l g96 was and buried in the "Folsom city cemet"ryj.n-' undentanding included
the history of the cemeteries now in what is Lakeside, this could be either the Nrgro nar (aka: citizen,s) cemetery or what is now called the Cook'VAmerican trgion Cemetery.

H.M. and B.J. Dains Family plots 9 missing and unrnarked The
Georgetown
elder pahiarch of these two pioneer families was Henry M. Dains, an early pioneer of in El Dorado county. His son, Benjamin J. Dains, and his family were also buried at this cemetery. There is no trace whatever of any membei;rh" Dains fr"1i;;;", at Lakeside today.

Among the known interred of the *o Bu": u.i Benjamin Dains (died lg2g) buried in the "Masonic" cemetery at Folsom; clarence G ^Dains
(died rgirl, son of B.J. Dains, who was buried at "cook's cemetery'; Elton Dains (died l9o2), son of Benjamin Dains, who was buried in the odd Fellows
Fellows cemetery; Elwood Dains (died 1908), son of n.r. oains, who was buried in the Odd Dains,
cemetery; Herry t{ontgomery Dains'(died 1900), trusuana of Susan and father of B.J. who was buried in the odd Fellows cemetery; Maggie (nee Robson) Dains (died 1903), wife 32 Folsom Tetegraph, May 22, l936,page2, column 3.
33 before
since Ralph died in 1936, it is difiicult to believe that the family plot coutd have been dismantled the time of his death, since he was fulty aware of his own famil/s burials. 3o Folsom Telegraph, October 3, 1g96, page 3,column 2.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento piled and Written by Sue Silver County, Catifornia Page20
Researched, Com
Updated: Decemeber 6, ZOO2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
of B.J. Dains, who was buried in the Odd Fellows cemetery; Susan Dains (died 1907), wife of H.M.

Dains, whose "remains were brought to Folsom for interment at the Odd iellows cemetery"35; and Almira Dains (died 1897), the sister of H.M. Dains, whose obituary did not state which slcfion of the cemetery she was interred.

In the mid-1880s, H.M. Dains served as the undertaker for the people of Georgetown. As part of his endeavors he also became the first monument dealer irr ttrat county tJ offer Zinc gnve monuments. The Zinc monuments were introduced and highly touted as lasting longer than many other materials used for such purposes. Unfortuantely for Dains, this new prodict does not appear to have been very successful.

SS Note. 5/11/2002: Also among the missing is Sabria or Sabrina Dains Johnson, sister of H.M.

Dains, who died in 1897.

Michael Doll Familv Plot I unmarked
The tombstone of Michael Doll (died 1836) also bears the name Phillip Henneman (died lg79) and is located in the Odd Fellows Cemetery seetion. The grave of Michaefs widow, Emma Lnuise Doll (died 1920; formerly Henneman), is unmarked today, and there are many recent interments which have been made all around the Doll/flenneman monument. Phillip Henneman was Emma's first husband with whom she bore their daughter, Elizabeth (Lizzie).

Dresser Family Plot 4 unmarked
This missing and unmarked plot contains the graves of William W. Dresser and his family, and the grave of his brother, Jesse Dresser. Early pioneer citizens of Folsom and vicinity (including prairie City), none of the known Dresser graves can be located today. Among the family who died and were, or are believed to be, buded in the cemetery are: Edmond R. Dresser laiei ttOZ;, son of William W. and Mary J.Dresser; Jesse Dresser (died 1874), brother of William Dresser, who the Trinity Church records state was bwied in the Masonic Cemetery; Sherman Dresser (died 1906), the son of William and Mary Dresser, who died a{rA,ubum, Placer County, and was "buried in the family plot in the Masonic Cemetery" at Folsom36; William W. Dres# (died lg70), father of Sherman; Edmond, brother of Jesse, who died in Folsom at the age of 52 years; and Rebecca, aged 16 months and 13 days, the daughter of W.W. Dresser, who died at Folsom on Decemb"rl6, lg6937
3t Folsom Telegraph, February 16,lg07,page 3, column 4. tu Fotsom Telegraph June 20, 1906, page 3, cotumn 4.
37 Sacramento Union, 12/20/1869; page Z, column 4.

Granite Township, Sacramento County.
lE70 U.S. Census Mortality Schedule for
Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Page2l
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
? o
Daniel Eisner Familv plot I unmarked
This family plot is located in the Jewish Cemeteryjust behind the Jacob Hyman familyplot. Today only the tombstone of little Sophia Eisner (died 1862), daughter of Danieiand M. Eisner, is found. The tombstone of her brother, Jacob (aged 12 years in 1860, date of death unknown), was vandalized in August of l89l when it was overtumed and broken. It is no longer in the cemetery in any condition. Next to Sophia's tombstone is an empty space which rn"y r.p1"r.nt Jacob,s gru* More recent burials have occurred all around Sophial sionr. th" 1860 U:S. irn * lists the Eisner farnily as being parents Daniel and "M." with five sons - Jacob, David, Charles, Marcus, and Milton. No trace of the family was found in the U.S. Census for Sacramento County'i";itilittg or 1880- This may indicate that son, Jacob, died previous to 1870. It is not known if any of the other Eisner sons rnay have died and been buried in the Jewish Cemetery with their sister and brother. (Daniel Eisner's eldest son went on to become one of the first regents of the University of Califomia at Berkeley.) W.H. FarmerFamilvPlot 2* unmarked
Located next to a tree, behind the Thad ltgfarland family plot in the Masonic Cemetery, is the tgmbstone of Margaret F. Farmer (died 1869), the wife of Winiam H. Farmer. William Farmer died in 1884 at Oakland and his "remains were brought to Folsom" on the evening ofNovember 2g, 1884, for interment. He was buried in the Masonic Cemeterfs. william's grave-cannot be located today.
* Between the U.S. Census of 1870 and the U.S. Census of 1880, baby Margaret Farmer (ll months old in 1870) seems to have become absent from the family. It may be tnatitre also died and was buried in the Masonic Cemetery next to her mother, or possibly in ttre same grave with her mother.

Joseph Fiel Familv plot 5 missing and unmarked
Originally located near the Levy family plot in the Jewish Cemetery, the entire Fiel family plot is missing today' Known to be interred in the plo!were: Jewish pioneer and family patriarch, joseph Fiel (died 1876); his wife, Rosa (nee Kirsky) Fiel (died l90l); son, lsrael3e laiea iSel; son, Isaac (died 1916), who was buried in the Jewish Cemetery; Isaac's wife, Gertrude (nee Sartain) Fiel, who died in December of t 899 of injuries sustained in a fall fiom a two story window in Oakland and was brought to Folsom and buried in the Jewish Cemetery.

According to Professor Austin Wahrhaftig, the son of Irma trvy Wahrhaftig, his mother used to tend the gmves of her relatives, the Fiel family, when he *ar a child. His recillection was that the Fiel plot was near the Levy plot toward the outside edge of the cemetery. His aunf [,otca Levy, 38 Folsom Telegraph, November 29, I 884, page 3,cotumn 5, and December 6, I gg4, page 3, column 4. 3e Israel has also been refened to as "Invin" in some history accounts of Folsom. According to his death noticg however, his name was lsraet, not frwin. lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Page22
Updated: Decemeber 6, Z0O2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
) o
later had her gardener tend to the graves in this plot. Professor wahrhaftig only remembers wooden markers on these gmves. (whether the 'burcide edge" of the Jewish ""ir"t"ry lnr*, to the wes! south or north, was not ascertained.) In the vandalism which occurred at the Jewish and odd Fellows cemeteries in lg9l, two tombstones of the Fiel family were broken ofi indicating that at that time, both buials to that time had been marked with permanent markers. whether thJmarkers **r tiily a.rt oy.a and never replaced, is not known. The surviving family, though, is known to have been-financially capable of paying for their replacement.

David Finch Familv plot 3 unmarked
There are two David Finch family plots. one is located near the rear of the Negro Bar (aka: Citizen's) Cemetery and contains the grave of David's first wife, Cyrilla and that of his mother, Frances A. Finch, which is not marked today. David's fathe(?) William tdi"J iggil, and Willie E. Finch (died 1877), possibly the son of David and Cyrilla, urc *lro located in this section.

The second family plol located on the western end and to the front of the Odd Fellows Cemetery, has had it's sumame marker and coping removed. Today all that remains or trrr prot are markers bearing the given rurmes of the deceased and vital sltistics dates. withoui study or prior knowledge of this family, one would be unable to determine their last name. of the known deceased Finch family members, the following graves cannot be located today: Daisy Belle (died 1896), the 2o-year oid duught", of David Finch and Lucille Finch (died 1900), the infant daughter of David Finch, who was I'laid to rest gesterday) in the Odd f.ffo*, C"r"ffi.;m The tombstone of Henry Finch (died ls89), son of David Finc!, over whose grave J.L. House erccted a "pretty little tombstone....in the odd Fellows Cemeteryat;' in rrrou.iUliot tgsg, is now Iocated near the rear of the Negro Bar (aka: citizen's) cemetery.

David Finch was the Superintendent of the Natoma Company vineyard before retiring to Verona" california. Because of his stature in the community, tris Lmity ploi would have been handsomely anayed.

J.W. Gains Familv plot I unmarked
Located in the Masonic cemetery, only the tombstone of John william Gains (died lgg5) remains in place' His wife,-Mary Ann (nee scurlock) Gains (died 1895) is noted as having a tombstone by the 1935 DAR tombstone listing. DAR noted that tire marker was inscribed with',Neylaid South wales'" Mary Ann's name may be inscribed on the underside of the stone which now bears John,s name only' The Gains'had nvo daughten who sunrived childhood. One became Mrs. Minor Miller and is interred at the Mormon Island Relocated cemetery in El Dorado iitir. The other, a0 Folsom Telegraph, April 2 I , I 900, page 3,column I . al Folsom Telegraph, November 30, lgg9, page 3, column 3 Lakeside Cemetery Compiled and Written by Sue Silver Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia Page23
Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2OOz

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
Elizabettt Beatrice, died sometime around 1914 and may be buried with her parents or may be one of the "[Jnknown" graves relocated to the Mormon Island Relocated Cemetlry by the U.3. Army corp of Engineers in 1954 for the constuction of Folsom Dam and Lake.

R.H. Gegax Family plot I unmarked
The children of Folsom building contractor Richard H. Gegax were buried in this cemetery. The concrete markers for Charlie, Emma and two unnamed infant sons, are located in the Odd Fellows cemetery. Absent is a marker for Anna Elizabeth (died 1891), who died of diphtheria in April of that year. Records from the O'Keefe Funeral Home in Placerville, indicate the death and burial of Arthur F. Gegax, the son of R.H. Gego< in August of 1893. Those records indicate that Arthur was buried in "Johnson's Cemetery" in El Dorado County. Johnson's Cemetery is located off North Canyon and Cleese roads below Camino. With other of his children buried "iFolrorn,
is it likely he would have had Arthur buried in such an out of the way cemetery? Edward Hicks Family plot 5 unmarked
There is not one tombstone or marker for any of the members of this pioneer African American family known to have been buried at this cemetery. While patriarch, Edward Hicks, is known to have been buried in the National Cemetery at the Presidio in San Francisco, the graves of the members of his family who were buried at the Folsom cemetery cannot be located today.

Among them are: Alice Hicks (died l9l5), daughter of Mrs George Hicks, granddaughter of Edward Hicks; Garfield Hicks (died 1935), son of Mr. and NArs. gd;rA Hiclcs,"who greiv up in Folsorn; George Hicks (died 1940), the son of Mr. and Mrs. Edward Hicks, who was interred in the ]'!i!izen's Cemetery"'"; Mrs. E. (Eliza) Hicks (died 1901), wife of &lwari Hicks, and Mrs. Isabel Hicks (died 1933), the wife of George B. Hicks, and daughter-in-law of Rlward Hi"k , mother of the late Alice Hicks, was a "member of a former FohJm colored familya3", *a U*i"a in the Citizen's Cemetery.

Tyler J. Hill Family plot 3 missing and unmarked
Pioneer Folsom blacksmith and hotel keeper, Tyler Joseph Hill (died 1875), was a member of the Masonic fratemity and is believed to have been buried ln the Masonic Cemetery. His daughter, Ada Marian (died 1874) was buried in the Masonic Cemetery according to Trinity Church records.

The tombstones of T.J. Hill, Ada Marian Hill, and Mrs. Marion Caroli-ne Hill (died lgz1),TyleCs wife, were recorded by the 1935 DAR tombstone inventory. All three goln", are unmarked and their location unknown today. T.J. Hill served as the Constable for the iown of Folsom and later served as a Deputy Sheriffof Sacramento County.
t2 Folsom Telegraph, March l,lg4l,page l, column 6.
ar Fotsom Telegraph, April 14, 1933, page l, column 7.
?
lakeside Cemetery Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia Page24
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
) a
update' 5/l/1998: Met with Karen Rader, a family descendan! who has visited the graves since she was a young girl. She has not been b3ck.for several years, since about.the time she got manied in 1975' In addition to the three Hill family members mentioned above, ,rr.-*n of Tyler and Marioru charles Hill, and his wife, Augusta, were also buried at Lakeside.

A second meeting with Karen' accompanied by her mother, Marion Rader, was held at the cemetery' Mrs' Rader was unable to locate the Tyler Hill plot and stated tt"i tt" last time she visited the plot with her mother (who has since deceased) inthe mid-1960's,the wooden markers which had always been in place at the graves, were still at the cemetery. Despite the many drastic changes to the cemetery' including the removal of the fencing 4glg tt" prrrJJ *iveway/parking area lt{rs. Rader was able to show me the location of where ttri Hitt g.u*i should be.

J.L, Holmes Family plot 3 unmarked
John L' Holmes was a painter when he lived in Folsom around the tum of the century. The grave of his wife, Cor4 who died in Folsom at the age of 23 (probably of complicatiois orchildbirth) and was buried in the citizen's cemetery is unmarked todiy. The couple,, ina-t daughter, Lizzie, died in June 1905 at the age of 2 months 9 days.old. According to thi records of the sacramento city cemetery Archives, Lizae was buried in Folsom. John dief in sacramento in l9l0 and is believed to have been brought to Folsom and buried next to his wife. Mrs. Holmes assisted constable Donnelly by identi$ing that some of the convicts who violently escaped potsom prison in July of 1903 had passed by her home on the way to Sacramento. Her oLservation led to the capture of two of the convicts in that cityjust a few days later.

John Holmes may have been an African American citizen or possibly a mulatto.

William Jarvis Familv plot
No one is believed to be missing or unmarked in the william Jarvis plot However, the removal of the ornate iron fencing and granite coping which once outlined this prori, ;l; as criminal as would be the loss of their graves. Jarvis and his wife, Rebecca |y1seil vanlandigham, were early pioneers of both El Dorado and sacramento county. In the mid-1850s,t.y *".Irr,e owners and proprietors of the Natoma valley House, a road house on the Sacramento to Coloma Road, just west of the El Dorado and. Sacramento county line. They also owned what was called the valley mile
Home, another propefty located on the sacramento Road in El Dorado ;t r;;ximately one east of the Natoma Valley House. The valley Home appears to have been the Jarvis, residence at the time.

A hustee of the Natoma water and Mining company from its very earliest years, Jarvis alternated residency benveen Natoma, Folsom and Sacramenti. He is also believed to have lived in San Francisco, probably after the company's headquarters were moved to that city. The photograph of the windmiller family plot shows theJarvis piot behind anJ aiagonaily to the right of ttrat fumily plot' Today the joint headstone of william and Rebecca Vanlandingham n*r"ilir*is, his wife, has been laid flat in the ground, its layered granite bases are nowhere to be fo,nd.

I-akeside Cemetery Compiled and Written by Sue Silver Folsom, Sacramento County, Cal ifornia Page25
Researched,
Updated: Deccmeber 6, 2OOz

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
) I
W.D. Johnson Famil)'Plot 3 unmarked
Only the grave of Charles Edward Johnson (died 1885), rhe son of W.D. and philenia Johnson, is marked in the cemetery today. His monument, presumably located in the Odd Fellows Cemetery, was vandalized in 1891 and was "smashed to pieces.n" tSS Note.5/lll2002: peter Kroffs inventory does not list Charles Edward Johnson.] Another son of Wiffi"tn a"O pftilenia" Emmett Oliver, committed suicide in l9l7 and was buried at the Odd Fellows Cemetery. He was a six year Army veteran who had enlisted in Portland, Oregon. William D. Johnson liieO 1SZO;, ^g"i 64 years and a native of Califomia was also buried in the Odd Fellows Cemetery;his grave G*ing no marker today. Mrs. Philenia Johnson died at Sacramento in1925 at age 66 years, uia *r, buried in the odd Fellows cemetery at Folsom. Her grave is also unmarked.

Zachariah Jones Family plof 3 unmarked
Three of the membersof this family patriarch 7-achaiah,and his ft^,in infant children, are burjed in unmarked graves at this cemetery. The twins, who were born and died on October lg, 1g67, were the infants of "2. and H.A." Jones. The 1870 U.S. Census lists aHanietJones as head of her household in Granite Township. According to the records of Trinity Church, Zachariah Jones (died 1868), was buried in the citizen's cemetery on December 4, l g6g.

H.T. Knight Familv plot
While the grave of Henry T. Knight supposedly remains marked by his tombstone, there is evidence from the investigative excavation that his granite coped plot was dismantled and the ornamentation dumped onto the adjacent State park land. Nathaniel Ifuight, the father of Henry T., John (buried Mormon Island Relocated Cemetery), and Thomas Knight (buried El Dorado Cemetery, El Dorado county), died at Folsom in 1871. He was a native of Vermont, as were Henry, John and Thomas.

The location of Henry T. Ifuighfs tombstone to others known to have had a familial relationship with the Knight family, brings to question whether their graves were also enclosed in the "Knight qamilv Plot." There were pieces of ooping rangrng up to 20 feet in length that were removed during the 1996 excavation. This may have been long enough to have also enilosed the grave sites of F.A.

Blanchard and family, Elvira Bradner, and W.H. Comstock and family, who wel all inter-related by marriage to the Knight's.

Kni qht/Shumwa:v Familv plot
Located at the western edge near the front of the Odd Fellows Cemetery, the lfuight/Shumway family plot represents the burials of members of the lfuight family who lnter-married with the Shumway family. While no missing graves have been noted, the military tombstone of K. Loren Ifuight has been laid flat in the ground. Because of this, it is slowly being destoyed by the equipment which runs over it during maintenance activitites. - lt- J-"!*t Telegraph, August 22, l8gl, "A Ghoul's Work", page 3, column 3, in which the Jewish and Odd Fellows cemeteries were vandalized.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsonu Sacramento County, California
Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Page26
Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, ZOA

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
) o
Samuel Kyburz Family plot 2 unmarked
old
The graves
Masonic
of samuel Kyburz (died ls98) and his wife, Rebecca (died 1903), are unmarked in the cemetery today. Each of their obituaries t"i"a they were buried in the Masonic cemetery, though no markers can be found. some of thri, "t found itarrn *a g*a"iiroren,s graves are in the New Masonic Cemetery.

Sutter's
samuel and
Fort
Rebecca were early california pioneers, and are known to have operated a hotel at at the advent 9f coloma the gold rush. Samuel *^ on" of the men to first discover the Manhall
valley where James Marshall and capt. lorr" sutto uuitt tt.i, r;ii, *h"re shortly after discovered gold in the mill's tailrace.

Edward R. kv.v Familyplot I unmarked
only one lf\y grave is believed to have been unmarked
grave
in the Jewish cernetery. This was the
He was
of the infant son of Edward tevy and wife, who diedln July 1g70, th;;a-ais ute, his birth. the only son born to the "oupt.- The remainder of ihe arity pr"irr* t , significantly altered by the removal of coping (material unknown) *o m"irplacement of placerite with more tombstones modem flat markers- The headstones, oiginarlv a.ing easg have been turned so that they face the drive straight on. The graves would trave ueen east facing at an angle to the present day markers' There ar9 many' many more recent burials which have occurred all around this two- ;#"ffi:Hj:lid a likerihood that some of rhe Levv e;u", have been airturr"a by the more O.C. Lewis Familv plgl
the
There
marble
are no burials believed unmarked or missing from this plot. However, there are scratches to here'
obelisk monument which bears the n*r, of the four Lewis t *til;".bers buried scratches
It is believed the granite base which once adomed this monument was removed (hence the on the marble obelisk), and dumped in which o ,h" st"t. p*k rands. suro*Jing these graves date from rB79 to 1954,aremore recent buriars and markers.

George Little Family plot 3 unmarked
The Little f,amily plot is located near the east edge and at the southern front of the odd Fellows cemetery' It is coped and concrete capped, ana bean the name ,,Lifile,, the mid on the face of the step. In to late-1970's, the operators of ut$iar c"."t"ty.rrcted west' three cremains niches around north and east sides of this plot. During his 1992 tou.ortne grounds with members of the [li::T"||HT;|:#:y, the former caretaker stated that there were no buriars in the Littte plot. wife'
Ashland
Elizabeth
pioneer George Little raised his family on his ranch across the river from Folsom. His early as
(died 1895), was a native of scothna *ali.ria"n of the Folsom vicinity from as l85l' George.Little's obituary information (aiea ig0g) placed him in san Francisco l85l' in and at Negro Bar in 1852. He was a member of the Granite Lodge No. 62 IooF. one of the Iakeside Cemetery Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
I
!
!
I
:

Folsom, Sacramento County, Califom ia
Page27
Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2OO2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
) o
couples' sons, William (died 1930), died there at the age of 77 years,having lived at Ashland since 1853. He was buried in the Odd Fellows Cemetery. it is not [no*n *t airnuy turre frappeneO to the other son, John Little, William's younger brothei.

The placement of the cremains niches around this family plot is at best rude, since people visiting the cremated remains of their loved ones there, are now walting on top oi m" Little family member's graves. Under Califomian law, the plot purchased bi ceorge tittle gamered him interment rights and rights to erect an appropriate monument on the ,rod", of the graves. The erection of the cremains niches, under Califomia law, would therefore violate the contract between Little and the odd Fellows. Every cremated remains niche sold atop the rinr" frot is tantamount to double selling (or more) the interment rights for that space in the cemetery.

Walter Lovelady Family plot
According to Dorothy Rollins of Stockton, the granddaughter of Walter Lovelady, this plot was once concrete capped. and bore a black granite marker with four rurmes inscribed. Three of the names represent actual burials; the fourth name being for memorial purposes only. In 19g0, Mrs. Rollins visited the cemetery and was unabte'to locate her family's gourr. wrr"n rrr" contacted the cemetery operator she was told that the concrete was removed Leciuse it had become cracked and dangerous and that the marker was placed directly onto the ground and was stolen from the cemetery sometime thereafter. Granite weighs 175 pounds per cubic foot. Mrs. Rollins estimated the marker to have been approximately 2 feet higlr by 4 feet wide - a rathei large marker. The weight of subh a marker would prohibit its having been tuk"n from the ""*"*ry*ithout benefit of equipment such as a tractor or backhoe. The grave site, according to the cemetery operator, is registered in their interment book. ISS.Note. 5/lll200i: Peter rroffr inventory lists Regina Invelady b. 5/3/1962,d. 5/19/1962; don't know if relitedJ Isaac Maltby Faqlilv plot I unmarked
Iocated near the rear of l,ot 14 in Block 44 (Cook'VAmerican Legion Cemetery), the family plot of Isaac Maltby (died 1887) was originally used for the burial of little Elizabeth'1,7,^liuv,the couple,s infant daughter who died in 1859. (In 1859, this portion of the cemetery, Lots 14-16 of Block 44, was owned by William Munay.) After Isaac Maltby committed suicide in lgg7, his probate case file in El Dorado County indicates that the family puichased a "grave yard lot,, foiSZs.OO as shown on the bill from Jacob Miller, undertaker. The price for a grave at most other cemeteries studied during th{ time ranged from $2.00 per grave to $zs.oo per tig depending on the loisi zn. A,,grave yard lot" for $25.00 in 1887, therefore, might represent a six person burial lot.

In a photograph taken by Mary Bowen, and printed in the Folsom Telegraph in the mid-1960,s, the tombstone of little Eljzabeth is shown upright and to the east or a hrier, ttt*-tiriro monument. To the right of Elizabeth's marker is what appea$ to be concrete plot lining. Today the large monument is no where to be found, and to Elizabeths right, is a marble obelislimonument bearing onlt Isaac's name. Eveline Maltby, Isaac's wife, died in f sgq and was buried next to her husband and child' There is no grave stone for Eveline uittr" ""."t"ry today and it is believed that the large monument shown in Bowen's photograph represented both Eveline and Isaac, *a tfrut the obelisk Lakeside Cemetery Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver Folsom, Sacramento County, California

Updated: Dccemeber 6, 2OO2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
marker now bearing only Isaacs name probably bean Eveline,s name on one of the unexposed il|tr;,Yil" recent burials are encroaching on itir ';g*; yara tot, which has so obviously been visited
ss update' Julv 1998: on arecent visitto the chung wah cemetery, adjacent to Lakeside, I several of the tombstones I believed bear additio-nal names trran thos" which are presently Isaac
showing'
Maltby
using
marker.
a piece of-twig I scraped the mud p"d. on ttr" sides of a few, one of which was the on the west sidi of the markir, I founl the letters ,,8y,, could be found. This is where Eveline,s name is going to be found. "'Y 'vlrvrs s I vuur J.K. McComber Family plot
possibly
This plot is located at the rear of the Masonic cemetery and contains the graves of seven and eight of the John Mcco*br frTtjy: one unknowri gour, that of little Marion Mccomber plot
(did 1907), the infant daughter of Fred Mccombea ,nuy ,*io within the plot. It appears that the edge
coping has been removed based on the lack oi aressea granite comer pieces on the westem of the adjacent coped plot. ordinarily, corner plr."r "r.""d-alone piots which are coped,
present
bear finished or dressed comer pieces with smooth ,*rfures which provide a nice visual effect. The corner pieces on the plot to the immediate east of the Mciomber proi rio* evidence that of
other pieces of granite originally abutted it. Further, tr,. upJgnt marble oi"ririlr""ring the names ground'
John and
More
his wife, Mattie, has been removed fr; irs'granite. base and placed directly on the recent burials appear to have encroached wiitrin this inalienable plot and may have impacted the older graves.

Dugand McMillan Family plsl! 3 missing and unmarked
Little historically is known of this family. The first death recorded is that of George McMillan (died 1900), the 15 year old son of "lr,ir.--and Mrs. Dougati nacuittan,', whose ,,remains were intened in the city cemetery near Folsom.ntl ouugtt;;;;" (died l90l), whose death resulted from a pine nut lodged in her tltoat, was "buriJ at potsom.', -The McMillan family patriarch, Dugand (died l912), a native of scotland and 65 years old ai rh. tir. "f
hi;*..:th, was intened in "cook's cemeterya6'" Mr. McMillan left a wife and severar children. Non" oi-tt " graves of this family can be locared today. r' r !v'v vr trts J.E. Moon Famjlyplot 2 unmarked
In 1935, the DAR tombstone listing recorded the markers of infant Edna Lorraine Moon (died produced
1916) and her brother, infant Kack Moon, the children of J.E. and HazelMoon. n" rggr listing in Rest In Peace also picked up the marker of pdna Neither Lonaine, but not that of Kack. of these markers was located in 19b5, when a brief inventory was taken at the onset of this ar Fotsom Tetegraph, January 13, 1900, page 3, column l. a6 Folsom Telegraph, February 23,lgll,page l, column 7
Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento Compiled and Written by Sue Silver County, California Page29
Researched,
Updated: Decerneber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
research' No location of the parents graves was noted and they will have to be relocated upon additional inventorying.

SS Note' 5/11/2002: Peter Kroffs 1999 inventory lists Edna Lonaine Moon (d. 1916), Hazel M. Moon )d. 1958), J. Edward Moon (d. r95g) and "Jack, Moon (d. r9r l).

Peter Monis Family plot 2 unmarked
The British born Monis family came to california in 1849, landing in san Francisco. By the time of the cholera epidemic of 1850, at teast one of the sons ** Iiuing in Sacramento. They eventually settled near Alder Creek and Mississippi Bar and remained ilere ar tne rest of their Iives' only their daughter, Louisa" who married -tjon
Juan M. winder and dieJat Lim4 peru in I868, left the family fold. fatriarch, Peter Morris (died 1882), had been manied to wife, Eliafor 55 years at the time of his death' Eliza (died 1888), was 8l years old at the time of her death. Their sons, ni"i*a and Robert, both died in 1894' Richard being the first-of the two to decease in March or*rut y"-. He was 'buried near his father, mother and sisteraT", which would have been near the rear of Lot 16 in Block 44 (Cook's cemetery), where the headstones of Peter and Eliza are found today. Robert Morris' died in November of that year and was interred in the Masonic ceme*;1 il6; Richard nor Robert's graves are marked today.

It is uncertain whether sister, Louisa winder, was retumed to Califomia from peru for burial. At the time, embalming compounds utilized arsenic, which arrested decomposition and allowed for Iong distance transport of human remains. certainly, if the body had been returned for interment at Folsom, one of the !o9al newspapers wo{d have found space to mention it. This becomes a question of whether Richard's obituary, which stated he was buried near his father, mother, and sister, was speaking of Louisa or another sister, possibly unknown to us. only one article has been noted linking any other female offspring to the Monis family and that mention stated that Mrs. Morris had come to town with her da-ughter, Mrs. Lewis. The only Mrs. kwis this researcher is aware of living in Folsom and vicinity was Mrs. Margaret Lewis. she, however, was a native of New York' while all the other Monis family members were natives of England. --J -"-"'vvla r Musso Familyplot
Two graves of Musso family members existat the cemetery and are located within the odd Fellows section' The grave of mother, Annie M. Ivlussg ldied t aiz), wife of t aurence tut*ro, is marked with a large marble tombstone which has been laid flat inthe ground. The grave of her son, Frank (Francis) H' Musso (died 1870), who was 12 years old at the tiire ofhis death, is located within the t7 Folsom Telegraph, March I0, 1g94, page2,cotumn 4.
ot Folsom Telegraph November 10, 1g94, pagel,cotumn I
o
Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia

Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002
Lakeside Cemetery Compiled and Written by Sue Silver

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
ae At the same time, the monument ofJohn woods was also placed in this location. lakeside Cemetery Researched, Compiled
o
Peter Imhof family plol pme two grave sites west of that of his mother. According to the records of Trinity Church, Francis Musso was interred in the Odd Fellows cemeteryr. lt is prrzzlil, 1,", Frank's tombstone is not located next to his mother's and that no familial Lution rup has been located linking the Imho(f)'s and the Musso's. It is far more likely that Frank's tombstone has been removed from its original location and deliberately placed inside the r"p"a]Joiplot. tsgNote. 5/ll/2002: Peter Kroffs inventory does not appear to have included tf" Irh;i;lot, and he does not list Frank H. Musso.l William H. Nichols Familyplot
There are no known missing or unmarked graves within this plot. However, according to family descendants, tltis concrete topped plot was once adomed with granit" "oping -J iron railing and chain all around it. That ornamentation_is missing today reveating that portTo* or this plot have been dismantled and without permission from the family.- . WilliamN_utcherFamilyplot
The marker of the grave of Elsie Olive Nutcher (died 1928) was inventoried for the first time in 1995' A death notice for her husband, w.1l-liam Nutcher laiei teroy, was founJ i, ,r," pages of the Folsom Telegraph- The 1995 inventory did not note a marker for wiuiam, but itls uncertain if one does not exist or if, because the inventory only sought to identify..rr..o tr"ough 1g30, his was deliberately not noted. The obituary stated that he was laid to rest beside his late wife in the citizen's Cemetery. [S$ Note- 5/l I/2002: Peter Kroffs 1999 inventory does not include William Nutcher.l John Odell Family plot
This concrete capped plot is located in the Masonic Cemetery. The tombstone which bore the names of John Sr. (died l88l), John Jr. (died l90l) and wife and mother, Ivlrs. R.S. (nee Berry) Odell Freese, was found in the Oleander bushes behind the maintenance sheds in 1994. The front of the plot is marked "ODELL' and there are two small marble plates bearing tto initiut, R.S. and J'A' embedded in the concrete topping, presumably marking the location or tie gou", of John Sr. and his wife. A concrete monument base is also embedded in the topping and remlins in place.

After complaint about the tombstones being found in the bushes, the odell monument was moved back into the cemetery but was placed near the tombstones of Rosalie and Camille Lamblett, behind the Benjamin F. Bates plot under the cedar of Lebanon trees.ae Thomas On Sr. Family plot Z unmarked
califomia pioneer Thomas on and his family, travelled to the new state with a contingent of Mormon immigrants in 1848. The family initially settled in the Salmon Falls area of El Dorado and Written by Sue Silver Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia

Updated: Decemeber 6, 2OOz

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
County, but was well known in Folsom and its surrounding communities. The grave of Catherine On (died 1879), the wife of Thomas, is located near thJ fiont of Lot 15 of -Block 44 (Cook,s Cemetery). This large, once ornate marble tombstone has been removed from its g"r,it" brr:lt;; laid flat in the ground. In July of 1891, the On's sorq James, died at Rolling Hil!-1near present day El Dorado Hills at Salmon Falls Road) and was buried in the "Folsom CemJtery,ti p."rumably hL would have been buried near his mothey's grave.

Family patiarch and one of the "oldest pioneer inhabitants of the counqt"52 (El Dorado), Thomas Orr died at Shingle Springs in 1893 at an advanced age and was buried at foho*ti. -Iil ir; marker at the cemetery today to indicate that Thomas' remains were interred next to those of his wife. Cunent interments are coming dangerously close to this location which is believed to contain the two unmarked, east facing graves of James and Thomas On.

Hiram Parker Family_ploj
A resident near the Fifteen Mile House on the old Placerville Road, Hiram parker (died lgg5), a thirty year resident oflhe_vicinity, and was buried "in the Odd Fellows plot in the Citizen,s 9emetery at this placet*". Parker's wife, Marie, who remarried after his deatir and became Marie Hall (died l90l), was buried beside "her first husband in the Odd Fellows Cemetery5s; The blue and gray veined marble obelisk monument (supposedly) marking parket's grave bears chain mars and scratches, and is located near the front of the Oda ieltows CJr"t".y 1no where near what could be considered within the "Citizen's Cemetery"), next to the coped "patterson,, plot. It appears to have been moved in toward the abutted oorner of that plot and the one directly betrina tne Patterson plot.

A video tape of this plot taken in 1990 by historian Armand Kimball (now deceased), shows a small pine tree growing in the location of where the Parker monument is now found. There is no sign of the Parker monument behind the pine tree or anyrhere near the location where it is today. It is highly questionable whether the Parker graves are where the monument is today or whether ttre monument has been moved from another location in the cemetery. -.10
nererence photograph taken by Mary Bowen (circa 1965) which appeared in the Folsom Telegraph. This photo is on file at the Folsom History Museum. 5f Folsom Tetegraph, July 25, I 891, page 3, column 4.
52 Mountain Democral November 18, 1893, page l, cotumn 3. -.
t' Ttt per the joumal of El Dorado County pioneer, James S. Russell, who, ironicatty, was the grave diggerforthecommunitiesof RescueandGreenJallevfromasearlyas l86l untiltheturnofthecentury.

Russell's son, Frank, and his grandson, are buried in the coped Russeli plot at Lakeside C"i"te"y. tt Fotsom Telegraph, August 29, lB8S, page3,column 3.
55 Fotsom Tetegraph, May 4,1901, page 3, column t.

I:keside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
o
Page32
Updated: Decemeber 6, 20Oz

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Franklin Rissins Family Plot 3 unmarked
Three members of this family were interred at Folsom. Son Owen (died 191l), was twelve years old at the time of his death and was buried at "Citizen's Cemetery." His father, Franklin n. niigins (died l9l2), a fifteen year resident of the vicinity, and the husband of Emily (nee Saul) Riggt*, was buried at the "Citizen's Cemetery". Emily Riggins (died 1932), the sister of Ed Saul *J th" daughter of Charles Saul, was buried in the "Citizen's Cemetery." None of these graves are marked in the cemetery today. There is a Saul Family plot located in the Cook'VAmerican Legion Cemetery, and it should be reviewed to determine if the Riggins gmves may be located within it. [SS Note, 12/6/2002: Peter Kroffdid not record grave markers for the Riggins family in 1998.] Caroline Rose Family PIot Zunmarked
Caroline (nee Riley) Rose (died 1887) was the wife of Milton Rose, one of Folsom's African American pioneers. Her death resulted from burns received when the Rose's home bumed to the ground. The funeral services for Mrs. Rose were held at the Episcopal Church (Trinity) and she was later buried "by the side of her son, in the Citizen's Cemetery.s5." No death notice has been found to indicate the name of the son next to whom she was buried, or how old the child may have been at the time ofhis death.

Her husband, Milton, who is featured in the book, Folsom Fables - Pieces of the Past,in the story titled, "Th1ee Gentlemen of Color," died in Sacramento in 1890 and was buried at New Helvetia CemeterysT where he was likely removed and re-interred in the mass gftlve now located at East Lawn Cemetery. Mr. Rose's name appears on very early county tax assessor maps as owning propeny in Folsom.

Frank Russell Famill, Plot 2 unmarked
The son of El Dorado County pioneer James S. Russell, Frank Russell was killed in a dredge accident in September of 1912. His infant son (name unknown) died in Febnrary of that .urn" y.*.

The coped Russell family plot is located in tnt 8 of Block 44 (Nego Bar [aka: Citizen's] Cemetery), but the two markers once located here can no longer be founds8. Only the military marker of Lawrence P. Paulsen, Frank's brother-in-law, is in place in the plot. According to thl Folsom Telegraph obituary for Frank Russell, he was buried in the "Citizen's Cemetery." J.P. Schaffer Familv Plot 2 unmarked
" Folso. Telegraph, September 10, 1887, page 3, column 2. 5? This per the records on file at the Sacramento City Cemetery archives. 58 Per Russell descendant Linda (nee McBeath) Van Gundy, daughter of Elmer McBeath, there were two markers for Frank and his son at one time.

Lakeside Cemetery
Fotsom, Sacramento County, Cal ifornia
Compiled and Written by Sue Silver

Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Historical background on Mr. and Mrs. Schaffer has not been recorded in this research. Caroline M. Schaffer (died 1891) was a Folsom resident at the time of her death. J.P. Schaffer, died in Sacramento in 1900 and his "remains brought to Folsom and intened beside those of his wife who preceded him to the grave..."se. The location of the graves is not given in either obituary, nor were markers recorded in previous tombstone inventories.

Melchoir Schlittler Family Plot l-2 missing and unmarked Another review of the cemetery grounds may be in order before it can be factually determined that this observation is accurate. In 1994, while wandering the cemetery in search of the grave stones of people identified in earlier researcho the marker of Melchoir Schlittler was noted. The 1935 DAR inventory listed both Melchoir and Mary Schlittler, but the marker for Mary was not noted in 1994, nor was it found in 1995.

Melchoir Schlittler (died 1890), a native of Switzerland, is buried in the Odd Fellows Cemetery section. His son, Melchoir Jr. (died 1905), a native of Folsom, was buried in the Odd Fellows Cemetery60, though no marker has been found to identifi his grave. Melchoir Sr.'s wife, Mary F. (died 1914), a native of Germany, was intened in the "family plot in the Odd Fellows Cemetery6l", though no marker is noted as having been found. Therefore, the "family plot" is not evident and the graves of lv{rs. Schlittler and son, Melchoir, probably located next to Mr. Schlittler, are unmarked today. ISS Note. 5/l112002: Peter Kroffs inventory lists Melchoir Schlittler b. 1827, d. 1890 AND Mary E. Schlittler (no dates). Mary's marker was not next to Melchoir's marker in 1995!l erozier Slayback Familv Plot zunmarked
Born October 13, 1819, Crozier Slayback, who resided at 501 Figueroa Street, died at Folsom on October 13, 1889, his 70tlt birthday. His wife, Minervq died in Sacramento in 1903 and was "buried in the Folsom cemetery62." (This should be interpreted to mean the Citizen's Cemetery, though Crozier's tombstone is located next to the coped l,awson plot in the Cook'VAmerican Legion Cemetery.) There is no tombstone for Minerva at the cemetery today, but it is believed that if Crozier's stone which has been laid flat in the ground, were excavated, Minerva's name will be found on one ofthe unexposed sides.

The Slayback's son, Dr. Charles M. Slayback, who once owned the home at 606 Figueroa Street and practiced medicine in Folsom, died in San Francisco in 1910. "His remains were brought to 5e Folsom Tetegraph, December I 5, 1900, page 3, column 2. t Folso* Telegraph, Apnl29,l905, page 3, column 4.
6' Fotsom Tetegraph, January 30, lgl4, page I , column 6. 62 Folsom Tetegraph, November 7,1903, page 3, cotumn l.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Folsom...63". There is no tombstone or grave marker for Dr. Slayback in the c,emetery. A married man, no information has been found about the death or demise of Mrs. EUa Slaybaclq his wife.

Many recent burials have begun to encroach toward the location of Crozier Slayback's tombstone and there is a fear that the unmarked graves of Minerva and Charles will be eventually be impacted.

Ira $owles Familv Plot Zunmarked
Located toward the rear of Cook'VAmerican Legion Cemetery (within l-ot l6 of Block 44), close to the tombstones of the Jarvis and Monis families, is the marker for the "Infant son of lra & Ella Sowles" who died in 1887. Ella Sowles, wife of lra and mother of the infant, died in 1889, though no location within the cemetery was mentioned in her obituary. Ira Sowles died in Sacramentoln 1909 and was interred in "Cook's Cemeterys." He was survived by three children - Ett4 Chester and Bert. Etta Sowles died at San Francisco in 1918, but there is no indication that she was brought to Folsom for burial. At the time of her death, she was survived by both her brothers.

It should be noted that the tombstone for the Sowles' infant son is now surrounded by other, nonfamily related tombstones. It is not known whether these stones represent burials (unlikely) or if the markers there now were removed from other locations in the cemetery.

SS Note. 5/lll2002: Another review of the cemetery might be warranted. While cleaning the Chung Watr Chinese Cemetery in April, I took a walk around Lakeside. I believe I noted a Sowles grave marker at the rear of the Citizen's cemetery along the line of bushes. A re-check is recommended.

Edward Stockton Family Plot 5 unmarked
In 1935, the DAR tombstone inventory listed "stockton, Edward No dates visible.", and "Stockton, wife No dates visible." There are no markers with the name Stockton located at the cemetery today. Research, however, has revealed that there were likely five members of the Stockton family interred at the cemetery.

Edward Stockton, famous as the industrious man who built the Stoclcton flour mill on the American River above Folsom, and his wife, Emily, lost two children in December of 1856. A son, Edward Coover6r, died December 13, 1856, and a daughter, Emily, died Decem*r22,1856. The couple lost another son, John Thornton, in March of 1862.
ut Fotsom Telegraph, April 15, 1910, page l, column 4.
uo Folsom Tetegraph, Febnrary 19, 1909, page l, column 2. oi Coo't "r was the sumame of Stoctcton's partner in his flour mill.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia
Compiled and Written by Sue Silver

Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
Emily Stockton died at Folsom in November of 1867. Her funeral was held November 11, from Trinity Church and she was bwied in the Odd Fellows Cemetery'6. Edward Stockton, having lost his mill in a lawsuit involving his partner, died at Truckee in June of 1868, where he was working for the railroad. His remains were shipped to Sacramento from Reno and forwarded to Folsom where he was buried by the Committee of the Sacramento Pioneers "by the side of his wife in the Mason's plot.67"
Having found the death notice for John Thomton Stoclcton in the Sacramento Daily Union of 1862, a review of the 1935 DAR tombstone inventory has revealed that DAR also picked up the name "TI{ORNTON." The 1935 list includes: Edward Thornton, Mrs. Emily Thomton, Emily Thornton, and John Thomton, with the notation 'No dates visible on marker." There is too close a similarity betrveen these given names and the given names of the Stockton family members to ignore. It is believed that the "Thomton" family recorded by DAR was, in actuality, the Stockton family members. Still, no markers with the name Stochon or Thomton are found at the cemetery today.

James H. Sturses Familv Plot 5 missing and unmarked
o
According to the 1870 U.S. Census, the couple had three children - Charles, Mary L., and James.

The first of these children to decease was Mary louetta (nee Sturges) Martine. The 1935 DAR tombstone inventory lists Mary l,ouetta Martine, age 24 years, died July 30, 1888. No tombstone for Mary was located in 1995 and a 1997 telephone inquiry to the cemetery operator was unsuccessful in finding the location of the grave.

James H. Sturges, a pioneer of Folsom -and vicinity and jewelry merchant on Sutter Street, was buried in the Masonic Cemetery in 190458. His wife, Henrietta (died 1902), who preceded him in death and was also buried in the Masonic Cemetery. Sturges also became the first weather recorderfor Granite Tovmship under the original U.S. Signal Corps.

The second of the couple's offspring to die was Charles H. Sturges wtro died at Folsom on August 30, 1900. He was buried in the Citizen's Cemetery6e. At the time of his death, Charles left a wife and five small children. The son of Charles H. and Margaret Sturges, Hugh Charles, the gandson of James H. Sturges, died in Folsom December 23, 1892, though the obituary did not indicate his place of burial.
6 As per the records of Trinity Church as transcribed by Lois A. Dove, docent of Sacramento City Cemetery Committee.
tt Sacramento Daily Union, July 13, 1868, page 3, column 2. ut Folsom Telegraph October 22, 1904, page 3, column 2. 6e Folsom Telegraph, September l, 1900, page3,column 4.

I-akeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002
Page36

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
In October of 1940, Mr. and Mrs. Edgar Martine of Nevada City, Califomia,- visited the graves of his grandparents, Judge and Mrs. J.H. Sturges and his mother, Mrs. MartineTo. Tod"y there are no marked gmves bearing the name Sturges or Martine in either the Masonic cemetery or the Citizen's Cemetery.
70 Folsom Telegraph, October25, 1940, page l, column 4. o
Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002
Page37

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
a o
John White Familyplot 5 unmarked
Between 1856 and 1862, fou of the children of John White died at Folsom and were attended by the minister of Trinity church. They were: Anna Belle (died ls62), charles Alexander (dij 1856), Charles Henry (died 1862) and Clara Louisa (died 186l). The 1860 U.S. Census tists John White (age 30 yrs), Ann White (age26 yrs), John White (age 9 yn), Clara White (age 3 yrs) and Emma White (age9 mos.).

John White, listed on the transcribed records of Trinity Church as John uwaite", died June 3, lg61 and was buried in the Citizen's Cemetery. His estate was probated in Sacramento CountyTi with one of the estrate appraisers being W.W. Dresser. There are no grave markers for John White or any of his children at the cemetery today.

Carl WindmillerFamily plot 5 unmarked
Photographs of the Windmiller family plot were taken circa 1889 and 1908. The earlier photograph shows the graves of Rosa (died l8S9) and Charles Martin (no date available but shown in ptrotoy, each mounded in the ground. The 1908 photograph shows ttre family plot as it was when it was coped ryitn Srgtqwith the name "Windmuller" inscribed into the face ofthe top step into the plot.

Today the coping has been removed and there are no rnarkers in the plot to identiff the namJs of those buriod there.

Charles Martin Windmiller, the son of Carl and Wilhelmina Windmiller, was the first to be buried in the plot since his grave existed at the time Rosa Windmiller was buried in 1889. According to family records, Aurora Anne Windmiller, another daughter of Carl and Wilhelmina is also buried in the family plo! though no record of her death has been located in this research. She would have had to have died after Rosa's death in 1889 as there are only two graves visible in the plot in that year.

Carl Windmiller died in 1897 and was buried in the "Folsom City Cemetery72,,, although the remaining face plate from the top step of the coped plot has been ieft in the ground within the Cook's/American l,egion Cemetery, just east of the J.B. Schmidt coped plot. Wilhelmina Windmiller died in 1908 (the year the granite coped plot was captured on-filmj and was buried at "Cook's Cemetery.73" This would be consistent with-the present tocation of the name plate and is also an example of how the section known as "Cook's Cemetery" had previously been referred to as the "Citizen's Cemetery" or "Folsom City" and "City, Cemetery.

This family plot has been severely desecrated with its dismantling. With five unmarked burials within the (unknown) boundaries of the plot, current burials which are presently encroaching within t' Sacramento Daily Union, June 25,1861 , page 3, column I : Ann White appointed adminishator t? Folsom Telegraph, November Z0,l}gl,page 3, column 4. 73 Folsom Tetegraph, November 14, 1908, page l, column 6.

I-akeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Compiled and Written by Sue Silver

Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
this area and are of great concem. Portions of the granite coping can be identified as those taken from the state park lands during the 1996 investigative excavation.

SS Update. July 1998: Ric Windmiller, a descendant family member, obtained a Ground Penetrating Radar survey through NoCal Geophysical Consultanr. According to Ric Windmiler, and Jerry Nelson, NoCal's consultant, the mapping of this survey clearly shois where overburials have occuned at or near the Windmiller plot. tn viewing " copy oi th" mapping, one of the overburials may be of a Slayback family member.

John G. Woods Family ploj I unmarked
lncated at about the half-way mark of Lot15116 of Block 44 (Cook'VAmerican Legion Cemetery) is the marker of Mary Woods, the wife of John G. Woods, who died in 1888. tn Fefiruary of lgg'9, Folsom monument dealer, J.L. House, put up granite coping around the Woods grave in the Citizen's Cemetery. In April of that year, House_.erected "one of the finest monuments in our cemetery..." at the grave of the wife of J.G. Woods.Ta
Mary's marble tombstone has been laid flat in the ground at its present location. The large, omate marble marker bearing the-name J.G. Woods, wff found in the Oleander bushes behind the maintenance shed in l9g4.7s With the information provided by the Telegraph, we know that the plot was coped with granite and that a "handsome" monument was erected over Maqy's grave in 1889.

John Woods died in Placerville in May of 1923. He was buried in "Cook's Cemetery."76 He was over 80 years old at the time of his death and was survived by his daughter, Mrs. Roy Celio of Oakland, California.

Today, in the grave to the east of Mary Woods, is a 1974 burial. It is not known to which side of Mary's grave John was interred. If he was buried to the east of her present marker, he has now been buried over by the more curent burial. If he was buried to the west of M"ry'r marker, he is in danger of being buried over by a future interment. hr either case, the granite coped and enclosed Woods plot, has been desecrated.

SS Updale. 1215/2002: From the GPR map provided during the Windmiller family plot survey, it appears that the grave of John Woods has been impacted. ?a Folsom Telegraph, February 16, I 889, page 3, column l, and April 13, l gg9, page 3, column I . 75 Like the odell tombstone, John Woods marker was moved back into the cemetery and placed in the Lamblett family plot behind the Benjamin Bates family plot in the Masonic Cemetery. t6 Folsom Telegraph, March g, lgl3,page l, column 4.

Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento County, California
Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver
a
i
I
I
I
I
:

I
i
j
'I
I
I
i
i
! Page39
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
tt Folsom Telegraph, July23,l88l, page 3, colurnn l.
tt Folsom Telegraph, March 14, t885, page 3, colurnn 7. te Fotsom Telegraph, November 20,lgg7,page 3, column 3. 80 william
Note that in the discussion of the cook'vAmerican Legion cemetery, Maggie cook, daughter of cook and sister of Frank cook, had married David B-lower. There was a time on the assessor,s records that David Blower was listed as owning these lots or a portion of them. 6l Folsom Telegraph, January 4, 190g, page l, column 5.

Lakeside Cemetery Researched, Compiled and Written by Sue Silver a
Peter Yaeer Familv plot g unmarked
The first burial believed to have occurred in the Peter Yager family plot in the ,,Citizen s Cemetery,,,
was that of william Hudson Thomas, the grandson of Peter Yage; A;;dt"g; the transcribed records of Trinity Church, this two year old was interred in the 'Folso. C"m"t?ry,, (read Citizens Cemetery) in February of 1870. He was the son of Thomas and Elizabeth ntomar. This burial was followed by the budal of little Mabel Thomas in July of I 88 I . The infant dril;; of Mr. and Mrs. David (nee Emma Yager) Thomas, and the gtutrd*ughter of peter yd;;:iilL Mabet died at Oakland and her remains brought to Folsom by train.77 - Feter Yager's wife, Elizabeth (nee Ruman of the Ruman family of Michigan Bar, Sacramento CounU) was the next to be buried in the family"plot in 1885. She was Ui'iJin the Citizen,s Cemetery near a nephew and trvo grandchildren.Tf Yager's step-son, John o. Brown, the son of ;ij|'J;:%l$8"?r:#(nee
Kine) Brown Yager, aiea in tsez ano was "interred in rhe ramily Peter Yager, the renowned brewer who moved to Folsom around 1871, and whose building remains on Sutter Stoeet, died December 31, 1898 at Folsom. He was buried in the ',Blower Cemetery near Folsom."8' He was survived by his wife, sarah, and son, L.T- (touis) yager.

Elizabeth (nee Emma Yager) Thomas, wife of Thomas Thornas and daughter of peter and Elizabeth Yager, died in 1904 and may also be buried in ttre family plot. Her huslband, Thomas, died in Los Angeles in 1894, though the only notice of his death r*" ftotn Elizabeth,s "Uit"r.l.
louis T. Yager, son of Peter and first wife, Elizabeth Yagex^{ied in 1907 in a Sacramento hospital. "His remains were brought to Folsom where he was buried."sr of the eight unmarked graves noted as being part of the Peter Yager family plot, only Elizabeth and Thomas Thomas' graves are questionable as to city of interment. The iemaindei of the family, Yager's and Thomas', were either buried in the same plot or very near each other. None of the graves are marked today.

Folsom, Sacramento County, California

Updated: Decemeber 6, 2OOz

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
82 Folsom Telegraph, August 7, lggT,page 3, column I.
83 Folsom Telegraph, May t I ,
I 9l I , page 3, column 4.
o
Charles Zimmerman Familv plot 2 unmarked
The only marked Zimmerman grave in th3 c.e11aery today is that of Bertha Zimmerman who died in August of 1897' she was interred in the "city ci.",".y- * 'the r;;;; *rrig"a to their last resting place in the family plot."82 Previous to Berttra's death, howeveq her sister, Ethel Zimmennan, died in lgg3 at the family home in clarksville, El Dorado county. charles Zimmerman was the proprietor of the western Hotel at flre Ethel
corner of Riley and sutter street, the building of which rcmains today. There is no record of being buried at clarksville, and with th9 ;:*in.s uring in Folsom, it is believed she was buried in the citizen's Cemetery, where the tombstone of her sister is located today.

Charles Zimmerman's sister-inJaw, Mary AndersorL died at Sacramento in l9l l, and was b'ried in the "Folsom City Cemetery."83 Thlre *. no markers in the cemetery for Ethel Zirnmennan or her aunt, Mary Anderson;

KNOWN DISINTERMENTS AND RELOCATED REMAINS
of all the research performed for this study, only two instances of disinterments were encountered. The first occuned in February of 1924, *t "n
tttr qralodaulhter of Folsom railroaa pioneer, John Kinney (died 1s64),-and the daughter of lifelong Fokom r"turign master, Joseph Kinney, had the remains of her grandfather, father and mother dislntened anJ retocated to a cemetery in san Diego. Her brother' Ned Kinney, lived there and they wished tn. gtulr;, to be closer to famiiy.

The second occasion of disinterment came after the death of Katherine Blanchard, wife of Folsom,s beloved school professor, J.E. Blanchard. Mrs. Blanchard was interred at sast tu*n c"ro"t"ry in sacramento and the jYiYil-g t itv apparentty had the remains of professor Bianchard (died l9l4) and their son, Leland (died 1903), removed from the cemetery at Folsom and transferred East to Lawn for re-interment.

CONDITION OF TITE CEMETERIES
At the end of the compiled listing may be found accounts of the condition of the cemeteries as folnd in the newspaper.ttuoughgul when
the years. The first arlicle noted occurred in March of lg70 a thief or thieves desecrated the graves in the Masonic clmetery by removing plants, flowers and shrubs. A s25 reward was put up by the Masonic fi;; -- Fellows
with the exception of the vandalism and desecration which occurred in the Jewish and odd cemeteries in 1891, no other instance of deliberate damage to grave markers has been Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia

Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002
[,akeside Cemetery Compiled and Written by Sue Silver

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Masonic
found' In June of 1890, "A Destuctive Fire" occurred within the cemetery which spread over the and citizen's cemeteries. "A great {eal o,f damage *as done to in" en ", graves enclosing the and nearly all the tombstones were blackened or bad"ly cracked up.,, mowing
The dismal condition of the c€metery was remarked on in June of lg9l. The grounds needed previous
and
year'
there was fear another fire would spread trrougrr the gmve yard as had occuned the "The remains of a great many people who-haveio rr"tiu. trr" repose in the all
cemetery,
would
and only a wooden board marks their last resting places. A fire acquiring any headway at bum them up and no way to determine the bwiaiwould remain.'!;il;.; wrote. great
Another fire occurred in 1904, this time at the Jewish cemetery. It was reported to have done a deal of damage to the fences.

For many years' committees comprised of membbrs of the odd Fellows and Masonic lodges would
attended to the needs of those cemlte.ies and the citizen's cemetery. Later, county Road crews undertake to provide clean-up of the Foundr. article in april orig39,-d";;;;, headlined an about one such clean-up, "oldest Tom6stone Marks it otrra victim,s Grave.,, The article informed that the tombstone of Henry Probasco had been rouna.awingthe clean-up by the county road crews' It related that Mrs. o.J. Miller recalled her father,.lling of hearing his uncle say that a colony of Germans who located near Folsom in early days, sutrered an epidemic of cholera. ,,It seems likely that Henry Probasgo (sie) may have been
"
ui.tir of that epidemic.i, ,h" pup., utrote, having drawn its conclusion on eroneou" liistori. inrormation.

In 1942, in preparation for the "Annual R9a{ Dav" during which the cemeteries would again be cleaned, the paper noted that "an additional piece of gtouria': l"a been takei ;;; added to the Cemetery
citizen's cemetery. This was tikely Lots I through r Jrgtock ++ 1*r,i.t, was later sold to Lakeside by the County Tax Collector in 19T6).

This report contains many facts which are difficult to fathom or believe. It is incomprehensible most to of us that such activity can and does occur. what we all must reconcile ourselves to is that those who participate in the "death industry" are in it strictly for one ;il; -;fi,. when a cemetery fills to capacity and beyond, there iJtittte profit to be gained in the future. cemetery
when those intened in a cemetery have no one to visit thenr" no one to watch over them, the operators know this. They can track visitations by the floyers |"ft ";;h;g.*s. also They are aware, on filling out death certificates for families o, fri"ndr, if there is anyone left in a given family who will be around in l0 or 20 years.

Funeral directors and employees all act as if ftey {eel become your p-ain_ on losing a loved one. They a close conlidant because they can perfop tr" "ugly"'business you cannot. you become dependent upon their expertise and knowledge and you rrri"frforted uy,rr.r. "J"g not be fooled. attitudes. Do They teach all this in undertaling claises.

POSTSCRIPT
Lakeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento Compiled and Written by Sue Silver County, Cal ifomia Page42
Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, ZC/|l2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
a o
The best reference regarding the modem funeral home and cemetery industy was written by Jessica Mittford in the mid-1960's. "The American way of Death" is an excellentie*ur". from which to educate and understand how this most necessaryof all industries has evolved ""J;. ;;il; have a built in business that is never going to go u*uy, how you are dependent on their services and that, in the numbness of loss and gdei you *J your pocketbook are vurnerabre.

The cemetery indu:try in-calfomia is an extremely comrpt and dirty business. In 1995 alone two cemeteries in southem Califomia were closed by the state and taken into receivership. one, Lincoln Memorial Park in carson, califomi4 was found to have utilized the same grave and coffin for up to eight burials a day, discarding the remains in a mass grave at the rear of their grounds. They had removed grave markers and utilized them for sheet curbing. Distraught families who broke into mausoleum cryrpts thinking they would find the coffins ortGir Iou"J on"s, found empty space instead.

Other cemeteries are presently under investigation for similar practices. The unfortunate part about these matters is that, after years of being under the control of those .-ot"t a in the cemetery industry, State laws enacted to regulate ttri inaustry have been diluted to the point aat there is no enforcement or punishment capability. A law may say "Don't do this.,,, but it giv;; no one a way to stop a comrpt operator from committing the act.

As it sands now' the Deparftnent of Consumer Affairs seems to be actively pursuing those cemetery operators who have raided their "endowment" accounts - stolen from the monies intended to be there when a c€metery could no Ionger be actively used. DCA's focus does not seem to be geared toward correcting abuses of older graves or the re-selling of prr-o*n"J ftoo. And until laws are enacted which provide enforcement and punishmen! these unlawful activities will continue to occur.

At Iakeside Cemetery, it continued to occur even-while the operators were being investigated. one of the comments made by Robert claney to the DCA inspector, Ron DeMadefror, ** that in the early years the graves were much deeper and over time the coffins and remains have collapsed and condensed to a thickness of approximately-4 to, 6 inches. To paraphrase tutr. claney based on what Mr' DeMaderios told me, "we don't bury that deep any longer. tf we bury ouo * ota.r grave, who cares?" Bury your loved ones here, if you like. But keep in mind, it would be nice to know whose grave you will be reusing or atop which pioneer citizen of Folsom your loved one will be interred.

ADDENDUM. December 6, 2002:

A new pattem of illicit behavior has begun to be discovered by the State Cemetery and Funeral Bureau in califomia. For many years crematory operators went unregulated. Although the state has recently enacted legislation which occuned in reaction tor the deorgia incident in which a crematorium operator left hundreds of corpses lying about his properfy, cremtories in califomia have also been discovered to have their problems.- [-akeside Cemetery led and Written by Sue Silver Folsom, Sacramento County, Califomia

Researched, Compi
Updated: Decemeber 6, ZO02

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
a o
Pacheco
As one example, in 1998 the Rogers Family Funeral Home operated the crematorium at the cemetery in contra costa county. The principal ptayen in that r"rrr-io *r" christopher and l"aurel Rogers, husband and wife. The state aiscov#a cremated that Rd;-r,"a i.n corpses and remains unattended and improperly handled. Though trt" *-ufi, J""'prorouted, cemetery the operate
and Funeral Bureau insteaa- r"ttt.a the case out oi court by revoking their licenses to california
and attaching a condition that if the couple ever again attempted ;;i;" ficensure in incurred.
the state would require them to reimiurse tn" Siz,ooo i" i""rrtig"tiln costs it had Some penalty.
l,akeside Cemetery
Folsom, Sacramento Compiled and Writtcn by Sue Silver Count5r, Catifornia

Researched,
Updated: Decemeber 6, 2002

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
a o
Attachment 6
Leffers from the Public

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
a o
@.%,y,g.%n4/
September 11,2002
Dear Commissioners of Folsom Historic District
The crematorium proposalfor Lakeside Cemetery must no!be approved! Asidefrom the obvious zoning violation of putting industry in a residential area, there are compelling health concerns that should absolutely prevent this proposal lr o m further c onsider ation.

As a physician and resident ofthe Preserve, I have researched the health related impact a crematorium would have on the people who live here. I am appalled by the deleterious fficts I and my neighbors would sffir by living next to such a toxic polluter.

Inhaled mercury vapors can cause chemical pneumonitis and may result even in pulmonary edema (swelling of the lungs). Mouth sores extending down the gastrointestinal tract moy occur. Chronic exposure is even worse as the central andperipheral nenous systems are affectedwithbrain and nerve damagewhich may be irreversible. Effects on children are more pronounced as their smaller bodies can't handle as muchpoison. Mercury is awell-brown teratogenwhich leads to miscarriages and birth defects.

The smokc, ash, ond odor, even without the mercvrlt, pose a pulmonary risk in acute and chronic exposure to basically, anyone with lungs. This risk is greater for those who are medicallyfragile or hwe pre-existing lung conditions such as asthma or emphysema.

Once these prticlesfind their wcy into swimmingpools, and our treasured Lakc Natoma, more healthhmards abound, and they are nearly impossible to cleanup.

Our health, lives, andfutures depend on each ofyouvoting your conscious, and your intellect. Given thefacts, you can't approve such a harmful proposal.

Sincerely,
& Friends & Neighbors of the Preseme

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
3RB4 : L. J. LR.FENT
PN 02-258: Tplicrtioo for conditiond usc pcrurit to oonstnrct and opcrete a crematodum in Lakeside CcmAuy, despitc thc following

1. Crematorium is NOT a pcrnrittcd usc ioany Folsom zoning district. (IlIt,IC Title l7)

2. The cemetery contains mauy old trecs, and is part of the forcst at Lakc Natorna - the samc forest that is in a Stae Part on tbc Anbrican Rivcr.

3. The proposed sitc for I crcNndorium ahrts singlc family hornes on two sidcs. 4. Ttrc proposcd site abuts Fcd€rrl wsters rod Fedcral land operdcd a a Stdc Plrk on two gides.

5. Thc taod is zoncd 'Opcn Specc Conrcwrtion ' (IlltC Tile f f

6. The property hclr rdcqurtc rcccer for firc and eracrgency protcction. There is rc access to the StatePed(, should E ccnatqium firc rccident occurl

7. Thc applicaion file is incompli:te: notitlc. t. 'There arc multiple CEQAviotations: Notico not filcd. NO Initiat Study in ftte tliL6tOZ. Owner saidhc did notdoonc. 9. Tto filc contains absohrtcly_no-rnE{ A"qovcrsight Trustee qgcncics, bccausc prqpcr, leptly Ead8tc4 Ncices were oc\fcr fited with the State and County rgcocics.

10. Thc ocnetcry ownership hasa chcckcred history, which includcr nnrltiplc sctling oftho rame plotg disappcarancc of gravcs and mar&ers, marijuana cultivatioq buriNl outside boundarice.

In an ordinary city, nrch facts would pre\rcot such a proposal from bcing prt forwrrd. I spokc with thc Sgeter{o}mqAugus,26,2@2. Iinformed him ofthe CEQA dcficicncics in his application. I also informcd hin it is neccssary to ttach e copy of the titlo to the property bccausc nc s6ti it rccently and rcbor{t it lasr year. Thc purclrascr codsctd mc after discoveriag the rcsclling ofplots, grave remornls, pd gardeq cncroachments, and more.
r roqu.cst 1'u,r ofrce invcstig*c rhir s65s. This ir not tb only bogus remniagfusc rcquest frehg me, Tbc cityRczooe Committce recoumendcd rezoniag a Stdc-rcgulatcdtoxic dte brAfordrblc - ,Hrysinq higb dcosityzoning. Plurning Stafiallowed aa applicationto mrkea pubtic precdstion before the ltrstoric Disftict Cousrission without making ur applicatioq withoui d"i"g ury notices, aod withou paying rcquired fe€s. Thir is typical Folsoi op",irion. ' v Submitted 9ll7 lg2by Lnrcfic t Larrcdt
T !24
ffiz a82L8Ft'1 P4
CC: LNS, media

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
140 Fargo Way
Folsom" Co, 95630
Sqtcmbo 27, 2002
f{f Frreira-ho, Chabman
Hlsnfia Dlsttid Commissbnqr
Plnnntng Inspedion & Pumitdng Dqt
Folsom City Hall
50 Natoma SfieA
Folsom, Co., 95630
This laq is being wrlfrcn to protnt the lahqide Memorial Cemetery and Mausoleum Crenotoriam's impad on the Nalonal and &llfornia Re4irtaed Landnsh Chung Wah Memorial Cemdq and Statc Hktorbsl Poht of Intqqt Yoang Wo Menorlal Cemday k ords to maktah praenolion of the circa Chkae Gold Rush culturoln rellglnus and archamloglcal speial featura.

Thqe chca Chinqe GoId Rttsh candqla for their dacendants today continue to be heW ln solemn spirttual teverence and profound saeed 6tcen for those intqned dernally.

The uisting mdal onsite maintcnance building at lahnide Cenetuy and Mausolcam has 2 ga?age rolhtp doon Because of crenated ashes h the air - eithq from the e?ematofiilm chimney; when ashq are put/poured lnto a contaho; through clean+p of ash raidae waste disposal or clenning up of lntqior crantatorium - the potentiat impad over time woald be signficant to both chung wah Menorial cenaery and Young Wo Menorial Cenary. Rennants ashcs thal are at the crenatorium witl be k the air and with whdswlll have to lnnd somqlace such as the C:hinqe buriat moands.

U the crenatorium conditional use pumit is approved, the most raponsible conditians should be mondated to whomatq owns, opetat6, cleans and renoves the crenatoriam ashes. It is requatd that thts l&q beincluden b, nnight's minates of the HMoric Dlstict Commlssion Meaing.

Rapectfully,

IUNE C CHAN
cc:

O

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

PETITION TO PROTEST BT]II,DING A CREIVIATORII'M
We protest the Lakeside Memorial Cemetery and Mtlusoleum building an crematorium at Natoma Street and Forrest StreetWe feel that this crcmatorium would impact the llistoric District and have an devastatingtbadeffect on air, envirrnment,health, humans, animalsr life, culfural, and archeologicat landmarks, residents etc. We request that both an Environmental Study and Environmental Impact Report be done.
+2
49 4q
o
o
Comment (-?nrn[)
,192- ^(dtL) -<4r-e_b1r4
Address Qrr;A
/4o fuao unq 6tam/&,/tY*
ry'a 7Q4o abq Ptse,Vu./#d
/4FtVry Warra. ' ?-ga
Name (Pr,m*)
Tawes L, YLlvr!)Tn
RtcwDl.MtNG
\Tu. ee'tzy'a{*'-
Signature
*a/n&J
"mdtfl, fr(,
&"a,u l,l1
w
Date
qft lfoz
r/r/*
rr6/, LI
%qbt

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

PETTTION TO PROTEST BTIILDING A CREMATORIT]M
We protest the Lakeside Memorial Cemetery and Milusoleum buililing an crcmatorium at Natoma Street and Forrest Street.We feel that this crematorium woultl impact the Historic District and have an devastating/bad effect on air, environment,health, humans, enimals, life, cultural, and archeologicat landmarks, residents etc. IVe request that both an Environmental Study and Environmental l-pCtt Report be done.
4)
?
0 a
Y a lla-', w
(rs
+
o
Comment CPlfu)
C t,.q. rzr.r atl' lrlor lb d t eb &ft
C- e- wate,rq -w t tl prt* Ad,t
lH I I OU €:rtn.p C,etaet<in!, I
,6yn e-i t o* bty,rn,Vg 60
Tun e tla uslvrT Qovi[o p, .tt
!
7h c iden 'fccs
;N
tS is foo cLas,
Address(Prinl )
lfuTavo uhtt fuldlt2u.W@
a 62 /3^rsoy)
45q C Lea'Ysfone ' PLe, cc
zA, l+frpfr ,taSii 74/Ear./ a* rfta2
Narne(Pil;7t)
'4<an4q(l
Mcr
rY,
uKs
A -,'ou 5 Dr,rJ
GLaA ys D" -t vrd
.776us*M e-rrr+/\t
Sigpature{UDJ
Jt^J" '8"';A
"++ffiDate a / X /,,4,1 /t4Abt Y,, arttfox ?P,F"

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
)
)
9 1)

PETITION TO PROTEST BTIILDINC A CREMATORITIM
We
We protest the Lakeside Memorial Cemetery and Mousoleum building an crematorium at Natoma Street and Forrest Streel feel that this crematorium would impact the Ilistoric District qnd have an devastatinglbad effect on air, environmeng health, humans, anirnalsr life, culfural, and archeologlcal landmarks, residents etc. we request that both an Environmental Shrdy and Environmental ImpriCt Report be done. a o./
o
O g
il
-l
Address
/oaz
tooz
$:o\sorn r
7oQ-
-ft&lnq_
e6 I,?
{x or1 (,\\
is'on^?V
?o1
-r
)4 uName f
Tx,ta"i<- T3w{ter
r(larr frtrank
l\\)r !i rC.i t ,/ /-. ,'/,lnItI i L/"rtll-\ ,l -la
A/ "no>t ffe
Signahrre
V/e-4=
Ntab.-- b&L
Snn.b-
()
C. J,N nn.l
Date
9- f-oz

4.5-ttZ
7'f -da
/s'a,.
-f-al

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

PETITTON TO PROTEST BT'ILDING A CREMATORIT'M
We protest the Lakeside Memorial Cemetery and Mousoleum building an crematorium at Natoma Street and Forrest Street.We feel that this crematorium would impact the Historic Dlstdct and have an devastating/bad effect on air, environment, health' humans, animalsr life, cultural, and archeological landmarks, residents etc. We request that both an Environmental Study and Environrnental Impatt Report be done.

I
I
t9
t)
t)
o
o
l3
Address Comment
so?
4ed;r)t3t-
'i/d,rrt
*rmazar'
5f
glJ
"Ylotvwr^ fiLos.nc'
5 o1 Yle,Atlzu
lrre
^l&a-t/q
Name
Qaral Flow.-.,td
lztK. //arrd
AF &,rwz
0t1r* i3,r0 KeaUALee n)
B oh
^LL-
++ea.r )Lil*
Signature
e^tJ
/J*n04
el/ etr//-
o9rr/-,{- &"^fu"rl
boh*E^
O&mlr4(
Date
q/gle
r/r/n
7frkr
7/slt
tfil,r
ilfl;

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
September 27,2002
Mr. David Storer, Director
Planning, Permitting & Inspections
City ofFolsom
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
o
?."1
tssl
5t-q sef,' ?s
RE: Comments on the Initial StudylDraft Mitigated Negative Declaration for Lakeside Cemetery Conditional Use Permit,l20l Forrest Street (PN02-258) Dear Mr. Storer
I have reviewed the above-referenced CEQA documents and I have the following comments
Descrintion of Proiect
The project description does not provide adequate information to assess tle potential environmental impacts. While this section does describe where the crematorium will be installed, it does not include information on the crematorium structure itself. CEQA Guidelines state that the description should include "the whole action involved" to help the public understand the whole project. In addition, I believe that the following information should be provided:
l. What are the proposed hours of operation of the project?

2. How long will thiS proposed project be allowed to operate under a conditional use permit? Is there a time limit, i.e. 2 years, 20 years? Environmental Factors Potentiallv Affected
It states that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and with applicable zoning. According to Section 17.39.020 of the City Municipal Code, permitted uses in Open Space and Conservation Districts do not include crematoriums.

In additioq the City is relying on a l4-year old Environmental Impact Report @IR) and General Plan for assessing potential significant effects for this project. As many changes and much growth have occurred in the City since 1988, I believe that information in these documents is too outdated to be relied upon for this proposed project.

I. Land Use and Plannine
As stated above, this proposed project is not consistent with existing zoning and the General Plan, so "b", should be checked either "potentially or "less that with mitigation" rather than "no impact."
Under the discussion section, it states that this proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Designation of Open Space, based on the assumption that a conditional use permit is required for a cemetery. This analysis is confusing and misleading.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

David Storq
September 2T,2002
Fage2of 4
o o
As the proposed project is located in the Historic District, reference to any conflict with the Historic District Specific Plan should be discussed. Also, according to the City's Municipal Code Section L7.52.360, Conditional Use Permit review, it statep that ttre Historic District Commission has the final authority relating to the issuance of conditional use permits for projects looated in the Historic District. This information should be included in the disctlssion and the analysis of potential impacts.

VII. Noise
As the hours of operation for this proposed projeot are not included in this initial study, I do not believe ttrat a determination on whether this proposed project complies with the City's Noise Ordinance is possible.

Also, the disoussion section states that a "standard condition regarding hours of operation will be included with the conditions of approval of this proj.ect." It is difficult for the public to assess possible noise impacts witlout having a description of these oonditions.

As such, I believe that "potentially signifioant" is more appropriate.

I{. Air Oualitv
This section does not adequately assess potential environmental impacts from this proposed projeot. This section includes a comprehensive discussion of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District standards, but it does not include specific information on Botential air quality impacts from this proposed project. For example:

1. What are the pollutants ftom the orematorium?

2. What will the levels of pollutants be for the crematorium?

3. What are the prwailing winds for the area? What is the projected trajeotory for air pollutants?

4. What will the odor levels be?

5. What about air emissions from metals such as mercury, lead, etc? As there is no specific information and analysis on potential air pollutants from this proposed project, an analysis and determination of potential impacts cannot be completed. As such, I believe that "potentially significant" should be checked instead.

XII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The discussion section states that no health hazards are associated with crematory use.

Other than Sacramento County, has the City researched or consulted with other health and research entities to make this determination? Has the County conducted health and risk assessments on crematoriums to be able to make this statement? If not, it appears to me that this statement is not appropriate unless zubstantiated by experts. What about potential health risks from meroury?
In addition, how will residual cremation remains be disposed of? XV. 9ulturnl Resources
As the proposed project is adjacent to an historical landmark (Chung Wah Chinese Cemetery), and is located within a o€metery with historical signifioance of its own, I don't believe that there will be "no impact" on a historic resource. The Lakeside Cemetery contains many graves of California Pioneers.
2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

David Storer
Septenber 27, 2002
PageS of4
XYIIL Earlier Analvses
As stated previously, relying upon an out-dated 1988 EIR for the General Plan is not adequate, and thus the impacts are not adequately addressed. Further, mitigation measures incorporated into the proposed project are also inadequately analyzed, and sitespecific information is not provided.

While earlier analysis may be used, CEQA requires that mitigation meazures be described which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

Other Comments
Mitigation Monitoring -gr Reporting Plan
What mitigation monitoring or reporting program will the City establish for this mitigated negative declaration? CEQA requires that the City adopt a program of monitoring or reporting to inzure that mitigation measures are complied with (Public Resources Code, Section 21081.6).

Approval of Other Public Agencies
The CEQA Environmental Checklist Fomr included in the CEQA Guidelines includes a question on other public agency approvals. Doesn't the Historic District Commission have to approve this project, and the State Cemetery and Funeral Board approve the license? Also, the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality lvlanagemont District should be included.

Public Noticing and Comment Period
The public comment period was not provided on the CEQA package signed August 29, 2002. Also, when and what media was the public notice made for these CEQA documents?
Environmental Impact Report
Due to the reliance on an out-dated EIR, and due to potentially significant impacts, I believe an EIR is more appropriate than a mitigated negative declaration for this proposed project. In addition, as I believe that this is a controversial project it warrants an EIR.

Sincerely,
Nancy Carroll
1348 YoungWo Circle
Folsom, CA 95630
cc: JeffStarsky, Folsom Mayor
cc: Kerri Howelf Folsom Vice-Mayor
cc: Cyndi Dow, City Council Member
cc: Eric King, City Council Member
o o
3

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

David Storer
September 27, 2002
Page4 of4 a I
cc: Steve Miklos, City Council Member
cc: Jeff Ferreira-Pro, Chair, Historic District Comrnisgisn cc: Dan Burgoyne, Member, Historic District Commission
cc: Candy Miller, Member, Historic District Commission
cc: Mary Hegarty, Member, Historic District Commission
cc: Dan McNeil, Member, Historic District Commission
cc: John Messner, Member, Historic District Commission
cc: Jerry Fry Member, Historic District Commission
cc: Martha Clark Lofgren, City Manager
cc: Mary Rigney, The Preserves/1.{atoma Shores
Neighborhood Alliance
4

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
laurette J. Laurent
Land Use Consultant
1212 Forrest Street
Folsom, CA 95630-2468
November 23,2002
o
Members, Folsom Historic Distrist Commission
50 Natoma Street
Folsom CA 95630
Request for official notice: 1200 block ofMormon Street, public street in the city ofFolsom Dear HDC Members:

O
With the assistance of Folsom sta4, I was able to obtain records for property which is the subject of a Conditional Use Permit by owners, Messrs. Claney. Pursuant to FMC 17.s2,36othe Historic District Committee has jurisdiction
Using legal records, it was possible to identify Mormon Street as a dedicated Folsom street and Right of Way existing for over 100 years- City staffwere kind enough to show me that Mormon Street southwest ofForrest Street is the dedicated city street providing access to ApN 070 0l3O 002 000, commonly known as l22l Mormon Street, Folsom CA ILLEGAL TO CREATE A LAI{D-LOCKED PARCEL: City statrreminded me that under California law, Mormon Street COLJLD NOT be abandoned because it is ILLEGAL to create a legal parcel that has no public ocoessr 1221 Mormon is accessed/served by Mormon Street, RECORDS SEARCH: a searoh of records indicated that Mormon Street southwest of Forrest Street WAS NOT ABAhIDONED by the city,
STREET SIGNAGE: The 1200 blook ofMormon Street southwest ofForrest Street is posted with an ofroial Folsom stroet sigrr.

ATTACHMENTS: Metrosgan APN records from Sacramento County Clerk Recorders' Office: L 1201 Forrest Street, Lakeside Memorial Lawn 2. 1221 Mormon Street, Chung Wah ACTIONREQUEST: I am requesting the Members of HDC take offcial notice of fact that Mormon Street southwest ofForrest Street is a dedioated Folsom street and public Right of Way, which has existed continuously since Theodore Judah drew the city subdivision in the nineteenth centuryi and that l22l Mormon Street is aLoVparcel ofRecord in Saoramento County, J. Laurent
Att:

Cc: Preserves Natoma Shores Neighborhood Alliance

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
LauretteJ. laurent
Land Use Consultant
1212 Forrest Street
Folsom, CA 95630-2468
Novernber 24,2002
Members, Folsom Historic District Commission
50 Natoma Street
Folsom CA 95630
Re: DEED Required in Applioation for Conditional Use Permit 1201 Forrest Street Dear HDC Members:

In reviewing this application file, I noted that if the property has changed hands within the year prior to the initial application, the owners are required to submit a oopy of the deed. This requiiement is stated on the city ofFolsom Application, It is my understanding that the Application must be complete in order to proceed to a Public Hearing and Finding ofFact Hearing
I beliwe Lakeside Memorial Lawn was purchased by Messrs. Claney from a large corporation during 2002, I believe this because several weets ago Mr. Lore,n Claney told me this personally, He stated he repurchased Lakeside Memorial from the corporation to which it was sold the previous year,
Since the property in questign changed ownership with one year, the new owners are required to file a copy of the Deed with the Application for Conditional Use.

If I were a member ofthe HDC I would desire to know the facts and circumstances surrounding the sale and quick repurchase oflakeside Memorial by Messrs. Claney, because they pertinenf When the Deed is obtained, I request to be informed so that I may obtain a copy of the odfilplete Condition Use Application File"
Thank you for your attention to this maffer.
o
(i.-.- -..-i
Laurette J. Laurent
Cc: Preserves Natoma Shores Neighborhood Alliance

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
LauretteJ. Laurent
Land Use Consultant
l2l2 Forrest Street
Folsom, CA 95630-2468
November 25,20Q2
Members, Folsom Historic District Commission
50 Natoma Street
Folsom CA 95630
- Re: STAI.{DARDS for granting Conditionat Use Permits
Dear HDC Members:

I would like to obtain a copy of the STAI{DARDS utilized when evaluating a conditional use permit pursuant to Folsom Municipal Code Section 17.52.360.

What I am seeking is the set of rules, gui{elines, formal criteria, which the Historic District Commission is required to use when evaluating an application received for a CUP, as well as any zupporting material contained in FMC and enabling legislation.

I have an immediate need for this information. Please ask your city zupport staffto forward this information to me.

Thank you for your attention to this matter
Laurette J. l,aurent
Cc: Preserves Natoma Shores Neighborhood Alliance
ATT i FtnC 17, t1, 36 O
o

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
rage I or r
I
haptert?.s2 H-p. HISToRTcAT *TRrcr o
Section 1752360 Conditional use permit review.

A. The historic district commission shall have final authority relating to the issuance of conditional nse permits for any of the uses or purposes for which such permits are required or permitted by the terms of this title, within the boundaries of the historic distict. B. In acting upon applications for conditiotul use permits, the historic district cornmission shall adherc to the procedural requirements set forth in Chapter 17.60, except for matters of appeal, which shall be governed by this chapter. (Ord. 890 $ 2 (part), 1998) http://www.ordlink.com/cgi-bin/hilite.pVcodes/folsom/-DATA/Title_l7l52l360.hnnt?con... lllZUzAO2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

I !gnEP;f,f-^t
r rtla\r f t autF,ttc J. Laurent ' Iand Use CoDcultant
_
l2l2 Forre* Strcet
Folsom, CA 95690_2468
November 27, 2AO2
Eff *'trrlffe{ Firo Departncnt
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
Dear ChiefDutton:
o
Re: L{(ESIDE CREMATORIUM PROPOSAL
In decades of practice, I have always herl en e.yontt.-+ ,a___J __ !_r - I am a March zooz iLisi""rt'#;.iilffi#-,trtrj:tr::tt"- with fire professionals and regutarors. sme,,ing,,rrg'#ff ffi ff$Ffi#aq:flru#H"*s:fr H:rffi underscore serioy problens "id thi; ai-prication]Iqilt,,rth
oumer r^oilbr*ry, who said he was unable to afford €xp€rts b*rr;;;i'fit n"*rirr'd'airioo ,ii., n-, ffi; l.p*h*, Lakeside.

I T *"rioe rn" r*H,?ttrrffiffiAtf;._T6,Tlffitc
rurnacs in whar is il*i::ftriJ- atrach a"*'i#l"a ptoiorl'-orl iri*i'gouea.m.ot. Mchaer rohnson. or u,""gn toG ;*tn m.ffiry6mmstr;g;1gryggg; ffilli#r"Tff""l?*:ic land- rhe* i' oJru]-ri#;;* auowing consideration or this EACrs: l ' A crematorium is NoT a use eligible for a 6?gq9"{ use p_ernit wirhin the Historic District' nor aay zoning dishiJ tr;;tr"^ . 2' Tbeproposed
rft ,ipi, it ** space consLation. tin shed t" n*r" nr r,r-* JiriJr.d*.r6; 3' ;;;fu as a statepark Lakeside Memorial r'"*'-tuta."y ir "
**aJ ,ite within the targer park 4. There is absofutery no forest. fire li.u*.,{g*"y acc€ss 5' rhe owners have to the rear ofthis site. i cnecierea rega-ooJpiil;iLgryand *;f";; to repurchase it. '".*loft ;ffi iffi fuffi ::lil";*l$iffi]uffi -ff"fr?".,r,,ot,.,,'" buriar 'l;'5:ff$"*:*l*yoiio Jr ilo*ll"sno pavement and Right orway with "'or":;ff*ffifffiffi:til"'t "n"roachmeils have a direst impact on fire & 9' Tte Mormon sttt"t -ttot"tt-t re$ricts the use a3!.ac,cesg to abufring chinese cemeterv properrv whi* rooia.i*';ffid

10. Ihe owners
crrir",oi, riiff*t sir", of Inreresr. btoe* andbclp"Ufi, st eetil;;;:t lI. There are brand oonpi*"JO H"[n*',."#.tr:ffif tr$*H,'ilffi *lffi uFJ*-*--W:H*;, :;ffi Hf..T'T#ff T';;ffi i;;iliLreesd'mped I rcquest a rdolrtion ooU.. tu lrlJ{ I" thc owner, and lirc hazerdr be immedietely ;*ilfu tr'#Jftff"'it)' ;d; #ifib's idili#daio-*, suuaivisiori code aod

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
.,Jr*t p G F !l.l*l-I f ,i,i3
LurcubFolsomFhcqdd .Lnlnae.2 o

13. For unlnown roasons, a full Environmental Impact Report has not boen donc, despite the huge implications for Lake Natoma/American River and Federal Lands, Stde Parh (PIP Satr appuitty havc been dircotcd to rely upon verbiago in the l98E Gencrd Plan toiusti$ Negativc fieolarations. Howwer, the California Attorney General has deolared the General Plan IITIVALID.) Givcn the facts, and the Ettached information about pollwion iszues, it is apparent a full investigation of the application was not performed. Issues for Fire tvlarshall include; l. Illegal encroachmcots on fire access stre€ts and rights ofway,

2. Poftrtial desecration of graves during legal Fire Deparbent aooess to l22l Mormon Steet for fire protection or other emergency,

3.-C\rtring of protecfed fiees, then dumping and leaving them as fire hazards, a. Iryact of cncroacbmsnts and obsfucdon ofpublic steets on cooperdive agreements under r+'iich Folsom Fire Department provides em€rgeocy assistance to othor age,noies,

5. Impact of enoroaohments on FFD ability to serve Young Wo Circle properties,

6. pernritting a gas firnace in Open Space Conservation zone' Z. Pcrmitdng a gas furnac€ in forestcd unimproved location (State Park) habitat for many forest .
oreafires and protected sPecies,
B. (Fautry) ito""s, by-which this application reached the hrblic Hearing stage without formal Findings of Fact by Folsom Firc Department regardi4g safety iszues,

9. dcparation oia full CLJP Application, including ALL required doanments, and pa1'rrent of all fees noccssary to cover the costs ofFFD investigating the applicatiotl

10. Insdtr11ing ohanges nGc€ssary to ensure.Iolsom Fire Departnrent rcryiews ALL applications for dwelopment, imprbveme,lrg e,lrcroachment impacting fire and safety access. Checklist.

This last point is very important. My home is tocated within a few hundred feet of the prypory fgrnaoe. A wild fire-could deshoy abuting homes as a rezult of the mizuse of public lands and willful obstnrction of pgblio sneets and RO\trs. I bave docernented moving of markers, and grading changes in public ROWs in the cemetery, which make me nrspec't they migtqt bury more bodies in dedicat€d s}ea nOWs. (tsaby Land" is in Mormon St,') Note in the asaoh€d Cella Barr Plat the 'Encroacbments" is blacked out. The original document must be produced. I would like to see a copy ofthe original.

Why is the crty not protecting public streets and rights of way for FFD access? lilhy is the city not enforcing agaiost the nee destruction and dumping ofthem to create fire hazards? Why isthe city, not enfoicing the State Codes governing proper use of land and protection of the healtb, safety, and welfare?? \{hy doeen't the city require futl street improvemeffs to Code? Why is publio land allowed to be used for private gain? Why is this property owner p€rmitted to endanger us and hinder our Fire Fighters from doing their job?
Becagse of the gavity ofthe sinration, I am copying this letterto impaoted entities. I am sure you will address these serous questions in order to protect us. I request a mpy of yoru report. If you have questions, please contact me at 985-4488.
t
I.Iauent

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
b&/t l^/ )NL
DumPtNG oMTo
Ee tov),
L A K€3 tD6 /vl€ln, C €/V6T€&
L
LReMkra&V
eo^)sfR-uc-tt dA)
POP.D
? A NcoNTcoL(^€L
/uUD * solL
&aa& of
t>O I Fc, Rn-esf
LAKESI D€
lvl €tvl ogt& L
LA U^J,
Fo rsoi BLzD
Loc.4Tt O A)
I e4t
tA o rzm oAJ S7.
/
DRA|^' Pt P€ Fp,nM Are-e* OF coL/s7leUcn o/4
ET+.TE PAE{ (treD, Lff,{b)
LA d^)
OF 4

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
'v C1- 3z P lt\r€ 'TeFe
TlNbeK' Dl? Y :
? P.elnfrn/s (rF
C UT b*zl*t
L tv€ o$l<
Te€ e, butvtPeD
QF tr knzos tbl
D61ilM R^*fiM|,,
SruI4PS
FebeF-AL Ura Ar ftmerztcA^) 'R€*tz tQtVstz tN
6€
PF+o-c a
SIGN
PotrJf tN e To
M o Alvt o n) sTftEl
INS r b6 LeEsrD,
rvl € M, tatU A)
Gftr 6
Lht16s tDe M€/n, Lffv)A)
A
d, rtr I

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
/
S rtr MP/e6mA,^8

IJF PJNE WE
re€frL ffi
17a1 mtnaON
L*r<es tD€
/vr€tuaLt 4t- L*dN
ftNDOrz br4/
c614 Ersey
aD, LfrN> { Larcs N*ram\ ft/w&-l:Avf rerv€'Q
Lerc;s (D6 M€l4, L*dA) 3 otrr/

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

L lFr S-rff/ro AJ
l33o Wu^tc l,ila
tu
DR"UM
ftecEtVrnl e 't'y61,!7tt G#5

LE APIN E
- LtqdlD o^)To gT*ra PheH-.
+-Q
DP.,D14 dtrH ree-> ruB€ INTO WET WeLL
CHLoftlato Z 7
t-oc/<g,b
Dodu
w6Lts xT ss Ll rr sTJr^1164
/73o - YouNe tlP
.
- et rcr6, futslt
S PILLED LIQUtD
FBOw| sr.5 gA" .

Corlr*tue p_ {-
P tPE,
l,iler APrA )
P*oro aN ryJ bA'/,
rJoF 4

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Esl :"#,li:'or''3
f o rn nt ss t otrl'
Laurette J. Laurent
Land Usc Consultant
l2t2 Forrest Street
Folsom, CA 95630-2468
o
December 6, 20Q2
To: Interested Partry, Organization, Agency

LAKESIDE CREMATORY IN TTIE FOREST
As you know, November 27,2002,I wrote a detailed letter to Folsom Fire chief Eric Dutton' I hand_carried it to rirc rra.rrt.u Ron phillips urd had l good discussion with him and two others.

December z,2oo2,I had a telephone conversation wittr chief outtorL I called him because I did not receive tf," rrtu- r"tf prottiis"O to me the2f.'He told me that everything is "gre&t" in Folsom and he ,"* .n a"u"topment and improvement proposals I reminded him that he never saw the incinerator ;"-il;fproposal r"d" e.rgust}b}},until I brought the records to him on ;i;;.;7i"-il"f"tt"J r,i* of anoiher huge local develgRqent.proposal that has never been submitted to him even though it was discussed at Public Hearing I realize that the deveiopment interests micro-manage the entire city ofFOlsonl but it is ;;"9;;t to .naungriift" ftoftn and safetyof o
"ity
frI the sake of aiding private interests In
this case, I refe*puiinrAty tothe potentiaf for a 20b0 degree inferno machine in a forest where tt "r"
i* No AcciSSll There is no access to the guag_e rvlooe the claney's want to put an incinerator, n" e*pectsto have nanrral gas or PRoPANE in-a locationunreachable in an "^.ig"n"y. I documented the forest nature of the locatioq the lack of access for emergency vehicles. t aocumentedG *irur. of dedicated public str@ts, and inappropriate re-grading, I appealed to Chief Dutton's sense of decency in protectiRg the lives of his fire-fighters who are called upon to lay their lives on the line for tirese propefty owners' I gave him color photos of thetrees illegally d;n"d;"*t and dumped olitt Tt"tqy and adacentFna: - creating tuel for an inferno. I g";" hi* the news anicle daailing the health objections of a physician. I told him I learned that " J., "*pi"tion
courd blow a fuJengine 300 feet away, Irold him I leamed a gas fire could rpt"oittoodftthe entrle forest along thi AmericanRiver, and destroy our homes easilS I described tt. ,,,'"it of the pf.rm *iianr. tltking place as I wrste my 2f lefter' I told hil it; may think the city is OK but I don't want innocent people endangered" ' uPDATE: There is none fromFire chief Dutton. He asked me when the application was filed, and when it goes," G Historic District @lan) commission for a conditional use Permit h".riog. Ruiror has it, that date is l2tl8/o2. who knows around here?

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
Attachment 7
Site Photographs

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
::i1t'i, : :

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
fiJ
o
E
ru
I
o
r
I
il
r

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

I c.,Y oF FoLsoir o
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMlsSloN AGENDA
"'o
illl,Hnff.;fl013*o
Plannlng, lnspectlons and Permlttlng Gonfercnce Room
Folsom, Callfomla 95830
5:00 p.m.

CAII TO ORDER I{ISTORIC IIISTRICT COillllS$lON: Ghair Jeff Feneira-Pro; Moe-Ghair Dan McNeil:

Commissioners: Jeny Fry, Gandy Mlllet Malk Roberts; Commissioner-Eled Susan Mehdng CITIZEN OOIIISUNICATION: The Historic Distrid Commisslon wBlcomes and encourages partidpatlon in City Hi$oric Dlstdd Commission meetings, and will allow up to 5 minutes for exprassion on e non-agenda item. Matens underthe jurisdidion of the Commission, and not on the po$od agenda, may be ddr€ssod by the gonenal public; houpwr, Callfomia levv pmhlbits the Commission frollr taking acilon on any matterwhlch is not on the posned agende unless lt is determlrpd to be en sno0oncy by the Commission.

OATH OF OFFIGE - Folltottl HlsToRlC DISTRIGT CoMMISSION

1. Susan Mehring
ilIINUTES: Minutes of December lE, 2002 s{and appmved unless there arc coreciions. ]{EWBUSINESS:

1. PN 02-25E. {201 Fornst Stnet Cottdi$onal Uso Permit to Lorin Clanov ooerelc a cnmetorium nygfjrl5ffi Home
Folsom, CA 95630
A PuHic Hearing to consider a rcquest frofii Lakesi<Je Cemetery for a Conditional Uso Pemit to operate I Crematorium located et Lakeside Cemetery at an existing cemetery et 1201 FonBs{ $reel. The site ls designated Open Space (OrS) in the Generel Plan and zoned Open Space Conseruation Dlstrid (OSC) and is located withln lhe Open Space/Public Primary Aree of the Historic Commercial Pdmary Area of the Historic Distdd. (PrQed Planner Assisilant Planner Jane Talbct)
Gomm ittec/Gommlssions:

Hlrtoric District @mmlssion:

Dirccton
The ne)d Hlstolic Elistdci Commission meeting will be held on January 15, 2003. Additional non-public hearitB items may be added to the agenda; eny such additions will be @ed on the bulletin boad in the foyer at City Hall et least 72 hours pdor to the meeting. Persons having questions on any of these items can visit the Planning, lnspeciions, & Permitting Department dudng normal business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) d City Hall, 2- Floor, 50 Natoma Street, Folsom, Califomia, priorto the meeting. The phone number is35*7222 and FA)( number is 35$7274.

NOTICE REGARDING Cf,ALLENGES TO DECISIONS
The appeat pcriod for Historic District Commission Action: Pursuant to all applicable larvs and regulations, including without limitation, Califomia Govemment Gode, Section 65009 and/or Califomia PuHic Resources Code, Section 21177, if you wish to challenge in court any of the above decisions (regarding planning, zoning, and/or environmental decisions), you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised et the public hearing(s) described in this notice/agenda, or in written conespondence delivered to the Clty at, or prior to, this public headng. Any appeal of a Historic Districi Commission ac{ion must be filed, in wrifng wfth the Gity Clerk's ffice no later than ten (10) days from the date of the adion. A fte of $150 shall accompany any appeal, payable at such time the is filed.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Terry Sorensen
lnorrest Street
Folsom, CA 95630 s16I
Historic District Commission
City of Folsom
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
September 9,202I
RE: Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium Proposal
Hearing Date September 15, 2021,
Dear Commissioners:

The same crematorium proposai herein under consideration was advanced by Lakeside nearly J,9 years ago as PN02-258 and scheduled for hearing before this Commission on January L5, 2003. i{oweue., that hearing was canceled and did not go forward when applicant Lakeside withdrew the proposal, apparently in light of the Staff Report prepared by the City recommending the denial of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to operate a crematorium on the property, Copies of that Staff Report (minus voluminous attachments) and the "canceled" meeting notification are attached as Exhittits "A" and "B," respectively.

The reasons advanced in the Staff Report as the basis for its recommendation of denial can be summarized as follows:
a. The use applied for was detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community in that the use would impact the historical character of the existing cemetery and the historical use of the surrounding area;
b. The conglomeration of historic cemeteries in the area combined with the California State Dredger Tailings Preserve dating back to the l-850s creates a rare combination of unique cultural resources that will be impacted negatively by the proposal; and
c. The use of the proposed project is not consistent with Goai 2 of the City's Historic District Design and Development Guidelines in that it did not maintain the historic use of the site and, in addition, did not further besign and Development Guideline Policies 2.I,2.2, and 2.3 (as detailed at the bottom of page 4. of Exhibit "A," attached).

In conclusion, the CUP sought by the applicant in this instance is identical to the CUP sought back in eariy 2003, and the applicant has presented no facts to the conffary. The proposal for the issuance of a CUP ailowing the construction and operation of a crematorium in the historic area in question was a bad idea back in 2003 and remains a bad idea today. The factual basis and logic behind the 2003 staff Report remains valid, and the current request for approval of a CUP for the proposed crematory should be denied for the reasons expressed therein.
'huly Yours,
TS/dg
attachments: "A" and "B"

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
.d"
,
t, a o
*.

Wr$dr/{/M
EXHIBIT"A"
Agordat*1ffi{il
PNofif,d8
HDC Mtg. t-tsh:

INSTORIC DISTRICT COMMTSSION SrAXr RNPONT
PRO.IECIT TTTT,E:

PRbFO$ALr
,to allmrfor oecGildon ofqqqadrg
RDCOMMEI\IIDAT|9Nc. rr
APPLICANTAND QWNEn:

LOCATIONT N
ASSESSORTS PARCTL NO.r
AlTAC[EtrI RETDRINCE IYIATERIAL:

PR(}'ECT PLAIIIhIER:

BACKGROI'NI}
'l"he Planning Commirrion rpproned
l. Vicitritylvlap

3. hojwt Dmcription md Cbematotiun
Illuchdions

4. Dosuumhdon from tha Sasranento
Cornty Higroric Comctcry Commission

5. Latccidc Csrrctcry Rersalctr pape
ruittcoby Suc Sitvcr

6. t€0tcsftomthcPublic

7. Sitc Photoglaph$
Iane Talbot, Assistant Plrme;r
a Uee Pcrmit and Vuirncc for Mausolcumc at Lalffiido
Msmorisl Lanra in l99I (PC9l 442). An sm@dinfft to tbc approyal wrr grartod tn lgg5 (?C95-033). That rpploval allowed fur tho concbuction oftwelw ronutoloums. To dde, one m$xoleum hrsbecn hriltand one edditionEl malsolsum isundo coustruotion, iuniffios'brdHhg, ryroxhffi ly,$l5dtiufl l$,ffi t'in
'nmttuqruktrf. Tho ft,ont of the pmject slt! te mootly lcvGl with a rliglt to modsfdo downward Lakeside Cemetcry Crcmatorium
Dcnid
Lotiu Claney
l20t Forrurt Shrst
070-0082-014, 070-01 30-062, 070{1 30-004
L&kcsido Cemetcry hns a varisty of mrturc dociduoru and cemetsry, nlong Forcet $Uecq is bounded by a brie,k wall cappgd slopo touftrds thc rcar of thB sit6.
evcrgf$en tr€cs. The tront of thc
with ufiought iron fencing.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o o
ginslo-fiinily ttddmps to lt! nosdr, fr#tFr# Aooss Fonwt Stret rc rtnglFhily rstdencos.

PBOJACT DD$CruPTION
ffilpf,#."rcftc
tbc storage ofgroundr
nrhbnrocc hilding is ordG of omug&d m€talaud cunriltly is usod for nsintcorncc squipcnr The rypliomt prroporar to iosall a lGfoot by 30. foot"TuFShed' adjEcmt to the odsdog Edrffimcc building to stor! ftc dirylmed minffimcc oquipment, No now utilide a'e p'roposed to bc oonnectod to thc shcd.

GENDRAL PLATflTONING COM|(}NM.TNCB
(Oeon Sprcc/Pnblic kimrry Arca of the lfisoric
dirfio is consistont with tbc Gcncral Plan dasig[dim. Ousffiilu arc a permittcd use wilhin tbc OS/PB aniry upon approval of a Condltionnl Uso P€nnit Thc sr$j€st ccmffiy has bocilr in opordcn since tb 18(X)'s and is a usc.

I.AHII USD COMTAITEILTTY/OOXNITIONAL USE
ddtr
is rcoonmmding rpontbrygrcedmanocs oftbc lud usc, tbcrc rucl!{y addidonEl cunimnnsntat strdios havo not been psledcd" ,should it be ee lfstods DisEict Commission's dceirp to plooacd with tbls ryHcdoc statrwil conmcoaa with thc rddidonal anvironmonfial $tudios.

Ilbtorlcrl Slgilcrnce
is conglomcnuion
Jctii*r, lvlasonic, Ncgr,o Bar, Cook'dAnroriorn LoEoq and Odd Follows backto arornd 1850.
inphd€s Sc.Citizen's,
ermroistratdstc ,ffi
2 ffi,ldonl

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
mas:
, To tttointain restote, qtd reconsftwt sttes wrrlch represent tln ltstory of tlw Folsom wea' ' Thc supporting polioi!$ indisab how lhg cig cm rcoonplich ftis goal. Polioy 2.l.strbs tbat 1o*dlt J6ffi;i rrrnrr.r and *iu rhorild bo idmdfied and doormootodto ryilftEt! 6cir pnorriuuln * *rtondon. To drte, cmnimf,onm ftom srormmb couEtt Histsic cemstery bo,o.r,"i* rne idrffiod ur rlti ar tocally dgriffGrrt ud tho Comirsimcrc intard to enffitmu*ia,oc66hy to ts s*r"rmtt Bsrdof Suporvicon forddgndon rsrnhistotic osnstcry.
o
ofa
Condldodd Use Pcrmit frr aconiompury land trsc (io, tbg crsnmtum) nay joopudlzothe etidbfility stths of the sitc and nightuto*to dircourqgc rathcr tban to ltlpouragB Nrdond Rosstet nomindm"
Thc
pr&rcncs $ould bo rivcoto ofhirtorical buildinss and sites. onthe lnftrmdon pnovidodtoqtrbY tho Srcrammtp Cdlnty Historic Cmstsry

PITBLIC INPUT
at&atoooilry. At tbe nercdry, isE rcs
.and suluml rtsorrloet.
ffi
ffi fit
ffii ailt
"ir.) if, i. +
,w
.Ikl
3

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
o
op€rdc r srwdodrm d m crd$hg
cc,mctcry d 1201 Foncst SUest in Ulc lliSorla DistsicG bot d on tho ftlloruing finingu.

EISTOAIC DISTnICT COMITIIS$ION ACIION
MO1A TO DEti[y flte cor'[Dmo].IAt USEPERMIT TO OPERATE A CRE!],IATORIUIVI AT AI{ E)CSTINO CEIVGTENY AT I2O1 FORREST STRBET IN TTIE HISTORIC DISTRICT' ffi
A, NOTICE TIAS BEEN C}TVEN AT TIIE TIME AT'ID IN TI{E IVIANNERREQUIRED BY STAIE LAW AI'ID CITY CODE.
o
B.

PERSONS RBSIDINC OR WORKINO IN lI{E
NEIGTIBORHOOD, AT.ID DBTRIMENTAL OR INII.'RIOUS TO PROPERTY A}.ID IMPRO'IIEI\{ENfiI IN 1IIE WET,FARB OF TTIE
CITY
ffiffiffi
c.

D. TT{E USE OF THE PROPOSBD PROJECT IS
ADDMON, THE PROJBCT DOES NOT rI.'RfiIER.

DFIIION AT.TD DEVEI-OPMENT GT IDELINE POLICIES 2.l,2.2,AtID 2.3 IN THAT; CEMETERYTO TI{E
SACNAIVTENII} BOARD OF SI,JPERVISORS ffiffiHt

2. 70.w ffi
3, BASED ON A LETTERFRON,T JAI\{ES A" PI'JRCBLL, CHAIRIVIAN OF fi{E SACRAIvIENTO COUNTY CEMETERY COMMISSTON DATED
JAI{UARY 2,2003,
t.
4 W

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

EXIIIBII "8"
?t fr ?k fr
Itistoric District
Commission meeting
(January 15, 2A03)
' The Proposed
Crematorium Project
has been withdrawn
by the Applicant.

I

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

February 3,2A21
Dear Historic District Commission,
I am writing to you today in opposition of the conditional use permit set forth and applied by Millers,Funeral Hsne,at Lakeeide Mernorial Lavvn, which ls ovvned and nperated by Caring Services Group. I live in the preserve neighborhood and have for the past 3 years and counting, I hope.

As I sit here and write this letter to you, I think about the reasons my wife and I decided to move into this neighborhood and staft our family. First, we were excited it was so close to downtown Historic Folsom. We could walk to atlthe great restaurants and bars to r,neet friends and fannily for gatherings or just a casual date night. Next it was the amazing trail head down the street and the r,iver. We have used the amazing tralls,for years now w,fth it'being so close to our home. The river is right here at our doorstep and who doesn't enjoy a day floating down the river or jumping in during the hot June, July and August dayls. Lastly it is a quiet and,quaint little neighborhood that has litile traffic and people who all look out for each other and truly give you a sense of communitY.

We have now grown our family and have a dog and an infant child. We have a swing in our front yard that hangs ofi of a very nice oak tree. I push our daughter in it very often as she enjoys,being outdoors. Our home sits directly across forn Lakeside Memorial Lawn which we really enjoy. The amount of wildlife we are able to introduce to our daughter as she sits in her swing is second to none. We have turkeys, deer, geese, owls, foxes and the bald eagles thatfly over. you really can't ask for anything more. So it saddened me when I heard about Caring Services Groups plafl frorn a nejghbor{o putin a svernatorium across the stseet' We'live just over 600 feet away from where they plan to cremate bodies five to seven days a week' I still have not received a single notice from Caring, Servbes Group about the planned proposal; I thought they were great neighbors but now I see they care more about their bottom line than the cornmun'lty they are so eager {o senre in their proposal to you all. The City of Folsom alteady benefits from the revenue the funeral home derives, even though they have to use an out of city crematoriurn. Caring Services/Miller Funeral Harne slmply just duesn't want to drive anymore to do it.

Once I found out about the crematorium potentially entering our residential neighborhood and listening to lgor Semenyuk speak, lrdid a llttle research. lt still boggles my mind. Why in a residential neighborhood next to the trails and river? Why was ii even a thought to put it in any neighboihood let alone a high'fire zone.area? .ln looking qp whaf Semenyuk stated about the device, "[lt] would be a pufi of smoke and then it would only be heat waves after that," I found his statement hard to belbve. The COO of Messinger Mortuaries{James Aheame) stated ,,Every crematory will smoke; if they tell you they don't, they're lying. lt's just the way it is"' When talking about neighbors complaining about lhe amount of ',black srnoke that is released from the companies crematoriums. The neighbors made severalcomplaints with the county

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
regarding the smoke and the honible odor that was released, Why wouid we want this so close to our homes or downtown .Folsom?
Semenyuk stated their company wants to be able to serye the larger lndia'n and Sit<h communig. I do understand and lbelieve it is needed with the growing population in Folsom' ln speaking to many different people who are $khs, they aSked why would they put it in a neighborhood, and secondly, they shared there are a lot of good existing options a few minutes away. I do not betieve $ernenyuk wants to really serve any population in the City of Folsorn except his own pocket. You can look it up and see how much of a financial gain they get off hav.,ing the cernetery zoned in open space,but,he wants to put a comrnercial incinerator in an open spaced area of our city. ln the city plan it states," The City of Folsom Plan Area has been designed to showcase the best of lefe ih Folsorn. ilbre than 30% - over 10OO acres - of thre total Plan Area is maintained as permanently protected open space to preserve sensitive habitat areas." This was voted on and approved,in 2004, solhelp me understand how comercial incinerator in an open space zoned area which is permanently protected is even on your desk and the city's own plbnners are helping hrlng it to your ears? Seerns ludicrous to me. llm sure Ernie Sheldon, who is buried across the street, would be rather upset if you are considering this in a zoned open space,preserve. lt is mind boggling 'to {hirik about One of rny other concerns besides the srnells and heavy metal.emissions which cannot be measured since they fall down so quickly is how the fire and police department are supposed to evacuate us in an ernergency situation across the street w)th added ignition sources and h,igh fire risk areas. They added fencing along the shed-yes sheds not a building built for a crematoriurn- but a shed like one you have in your backyard for mowers and shovels. There isn't a lock box to even get in at night let alone the EMS personnelwould block our only exit out' No police consideration,has eyen been given to this projecl and the increase demand which would reduce resources for the rest of the city with Caring Services wanting to allow in person cremations which accord'ing to Semerryukthe Skh r,equire wlthor.rt creating calls for services for fighting, drunk in public, DUI's and domestic violence issues which can and have occurred. All of these reguirernents are clearly outlined in CEQA guidelines and ignored by Caring Services Group.

I hope you really look at the motive behind this proposaland what you will beo-ening other zoned open space areas to jn the long fun, and consider the'bad precedent you will iet with this proposed project, This neighborhood is like a family to many of us. We ask, if it was your neighborhood would you want it with the unknowns presented to irou? ls it right for a reskJential neighborhood? ls it right for an open spaced area? ls it right for Folsom? Ask yourself why wouldn't this be in a eommercially zoned area?
Please, please v,ots "No" on thb proposalTirn McGarry
1204 Forrest St.

Registered voter

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

February 3,2A21
Dear Historic District Commission,
I am writing to you today in opposition of the conditional use permit set forth and applied by Millerls,Funeral Hcrne,at Lakes'ide Mernorial l-avvn, which is ovvned and operated by Caring Services Group. I live in the preserve neighborhood and have for the past 3 years and counting, I hope.

As I sit here and write this letter to yor,r, I think about the reasons my wife and I decided to move into this neighborhood and stafi our family. First, we were excited it was so close to downtown Historic Fofsom. We could walk to allthe gr'eat restaurants and bars to r,neet fniends and fannily for gatherings or just a casual date night. Next it was the amazing trail head down the street and the r,iver, We have used the amazing trails for years now w.fth it being so close to our home. The river is right here at our doorstep and who doesn'l enjoy a day floating down the river or jumping in durinE the hot Jur€" July and August dbys. Lastly it ib a quiet and,quaint little neighborhood that has little traffic and people who all look out for each other and truly give you a sense of community.

We have now grcwn our family and have a dog and an infant child. We have a swing in our front yard that hangs off of a very nice oak tree. I push our daughter in it very often as she enjoys,being outdoors. Our home sits direotly across from Lakeside Memorial Lawn which we really enjoy. The amount of wildlife we are able to introduce to our daughter as she sits in her swing is second to none. We have turkeys, deer, geese, owls, foxes and the baldreagles thatfly over. You really can't ask for anything more. So it saddened me when I heard about Caring Se;vices Groups plan frorn a neighbor to pt t in a evsrnatotium across the sbeet. We 'live just over 600 feet away from where they plan to cremate bodies five to seven days a week. I still have not received a single notice from Caring, Servbes Group about the planned proposal. I thought they were great neighbors but now I see they care more about their bottom line than the cornmun'ity they are so eager{o serve in,theirproposal to you a{1. The City of Folsom already benefits from the revenue the funeral home derives, even though they have to usB an out of city crematoriurn. Caring Services/Miller Funeral Ffiame simply iust doesn't want to drive anymore to do it.

Once I found out about the crematorium potentially entering our residential neighborhood and listening to lgor Semenyuk speak, lidid a llttle research. lt still boggles rny rnind. Why in a residential neighborhood next to the trails and river? Why was it even a thought to put it in any neighborhood {et alone a high'fire zone.area? ,ln,looking up what Semenyuk stated about the device, "[lt] would be a puff of smoke and then it would only be heat waves after that." I found his statement hard to belbve. The COO of Messinger Mortuaries {James Aheame) stiated "Every crematory will smoke; if they tell you they don't, they're lying. lt's just the way it is." When talking about neighbors complaining about the arnount of iblack srnoke that is released from the companies crematoriums. The neighbors made severalcomplaints with the county

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
regarding the smoke and the honible odor that was released. Why would we want this so close to our homes or downtown.Folsom?
Semenyuk stated their company wants to be able to serve the larger lndian and Sikh community. I do understand and lbelieve it is needed with the growing population in Folsom. tn speaking to many different people Who are Sikhs, they aSked why would they put it in a neighborhood, and secondly, they shared there are a lot of good existing options a few minutes away. I do not believe Sernenyuk wants to real'ly serve any population in the City of Folsonr except his own pocket. You can look it up and see how much of a financial gain they get ofi :hav,ing the cemetery zoned in open space,buthe wanls to put a comrnercial incinerator in an open spaced area of our city. ln the cig plan it states," The City of Folsom Plan Area has been designed to showcase the best of life in Folsom. ttltrre than 3070 - over 1:0OO acres - of thre total plan Area is maintained as permanently protected open space to preserve sensitive habitat areas." This was voted on and approved,in 2004, solhelp me understand how comercial incinerator in an open space zoned area which is permanently protected is even on your desk and the city's own plbnners are helping bring it to your ears? Seerns ludicrous to me. I'm sure Ernie Sheldon, who is buried across the street, would be rather upset if you are considering this in a zoned open space,preserve. lt is mind ,boggling ,to thitik about One of rny other concerns besides the srnells and heavy metal,emissions which cannot be measured since they fall down so quickly is how the fire and police department are supposed to evacuate us tn a1 emergency situation across the street wtrth added ignition sources and high fire risk areas. They added fencing along the shed-yes sheds not a building built for a crematoriunr but a shed like ona you have in your backyard for mowers and sttovels- There isn't a lock box to even get in at night let alone the EMS personnelwould block our only exit out.

No police consideration'has even been given to this project and the increase demand which would reduce resources for the rest of the city with Caring Services wanting to allow in person cremations which acmrding to Semerryuk the Skh reqr-rhe withorlt cneating calls for services for fighting, drunk in public, DUI's and domestic violence issues which can and have occurred' All of these requirements are clearly outlined in OEQA guidelines and ignored by Caring Services Group.

I hope you really look at the motive behind this proposal and what you will beo-ening other zoned open space areas to jn the long run, and consider the'bad precedent you will set with this proposed project. This neighborhood is like a family to many of us. We ask, if it was your neighborhood would you want it with the unknowns presented to you? ls it right for a reskJential neighborhood? ls it right for an open spaced area? ls it right for Folsom? Ask yourself why wouldn't this be in a commercially zoned area?
Please, please rt,ote "No'on thb proposal.

T,im McGany
lForrestst.

Registered vo'ter

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Josh Kinkade
From:

Sent:
lo:

Subject:

FYI
KellyMullett
Adnt ini str a tiire,4.s.srsl n rr I
Community Development Department
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
O:916.461.623'1
F:916.355.7274
elt I gF
FmI"'Giffie'fl
nt *1 ts?.1 rvrl lv *rar$Fr
OS@ www.fotsonr.ca.us
From: Tim Milne
Sent: Thursday, July 8,2O2t 11:53 AM
To: Kelly Mullett <[email protected]>
Cc:

Subject: Dave Higgins & crematorium plans
Kelly Mullett
Thursday, luly 8,2021 4:31 PM
Josh Kinkade
FW: Dave Higgins & crematorium plans
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organilation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

A crematorium should not be locatied within 1 mile of human habitat! 1

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

Josh Kinkade
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

FYI
KellyMullett
,4 r/n i ini.sf i'c I r r,c,4.s.sisfrlr I
Community Development Department
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
O:916.461 .6231
F:916.355.7274
Kelly Mullett
Thursday, July 8, 2021 10:58 AM
Josh Kinkade
FW: Lakeside Memorial Lawn crematorium concerns.
ffi-i Ftri}tr,*S{Fef{
eil 1 s:,
*tti9!trf ilf I nf fiF?llpl
0S@ ytluy.qqt$rrr-lu uo
From: TIMOTHYTHOMAS
Sent: Thursday, July 8,202L 10:54 AM
To: Kelly Mullett <[email protected]>
Subject: Fw: Lakeside Memorial Lawn crematorium concerns.

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Sent from Outlook
From: TIMOTHY THOMAS
Sent: Thursday, July 8,2O2L 10:49 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <l"l"[email protected]>; kerri@ atla nticcorrostone net neers.com <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; thehfra@ ail.com <thehfra @gmail.com>; siohnson @folsom.ca.us <sioh [email protected]> Subject: Lakeside Memorial Lawn crematorium concerns.
1 Dear Council members and City Representatives,

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

I have recently been informed of the Lakeside Memorial Lawn's proposal for building a crematorium onsite and I am extremely concerned.

My fiance and our 9 week old son, plus a 12 year old son live just a stones throw away on Young Wo Circle. I myself have respiratory issues, and that along with having a newborn leaves me with great concern. Not to mention the chilling psychological effects of knowing that bodies are being cremated just a block away. lt will have a lasting effect on our piece of mind, quality of life, health and property values.

With enough concern already regarding the annual wildfire smoke issues, please spare us another health and psychological factor in this beautiful city that we call home.

Warm regards,
Timothy Thomas
Young Wo Circle
Folsom, Ca
Sent from Outlook
Sent from Outlook
2

05/10/2022 Item No.18.

To:

From:

Subject:

Datei
I
Josh Kinkade
Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium
Saturday, February 5, 2022 1:53:39 PM
You don't often get email from Learn why this is important February 5,2022
Mr. Josh Kinkade
Associate Planner
City of Folsom Historic District Commission
Re: Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium
Planning No. PN-19-1B2
Dear Mr. Kinkade
I am writing in opposition to the proposed Lakeside Memorial Lawn Crematorium project. The project site is zoned OS/P (Open Space/public PrimaryArea)with an underlying zoning of OSC (Open Space and Conservation). The request of a Conditional Use Permit should be denied because the emissions will degrade the visual character of the area and mercury in the TAC have bioaccumulative and biomaginification effects on the adjacent waterway and its organisms.

The site is located adjacent to Jedidiah Smith MemorialTrial (American River Bike Trail), Lake Natoma, and a residential area. The American River Bike Trail runs adjacent to the American River and Lake Natoma. The trail and lake are used and frequented by families, tourists, and recreation visitors such as bikers, hikers, nature groups, picnickers, kayakers, and other water sportenthusiasts. Theadjacentresidentialareaiscomprisedofseniorcitizensandyoung families who recreate outside and have gardens and fruit trees to add to their food supplies.

I disagree with the applicant's findings in the lnitial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section 9, Environmental lnitial Study Checklist, Section l Aesthetics), the applicant determined a "Less Than Significant lmpact" for letter c. ln rebuttal, the proposed project does pose a "Potentially Significant lmpact".

The proposed project does pose a "Potentially Significant lmpact" underAppendix G, CEQA, 1 Aesthetics, letter c. Appendix G, CEQA states: "c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings." The emissions of a crematorium will CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click Iinks or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

05/10/2022 Item No.18.
significantly degrade the visual character of the area in respect to both the recreation users/visitors of the American River Bike Trail, Lake Natoma and the adjacent residential area.

The recreation users of the American River Bike Trail and Lake Natoma are humans who are visiting and usingthe area to experiencethe natural surroundings of a riparian habitat, which include the aesthetics of the tree lines and skyline. These "viewers" are specifically seeking a view of nature and the surrounding riparian habitat. Emissions from a crematorium will "substantially degrade" the visual quality of the area. Humans seeking scenic views and experiences with nature are especially sensitive to man-created emissions. They are even more sensitive knowing the emissions are the resulting emissions from cremating human remains.

The "visual character and quality of the site" will also be substantially degraded for the residents in the adjacent area. The neighboring residents enjoy the outdoors of their backyards and enjgy the foods from their outdoor gardens. These groups of viewers will be substantially affected by seeing emissions and their awareness that they are from an adjacent crematorium while eating food from their gardens, having an outdoor dinner party, or having their children playing outdoors. The emissions from the proposed project will substantially affect their visual quality.
ln Section lll, Air Quality, letter c or the lnitial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, found that "the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable increase of any criteria pollutant." "Crematoriums are sources of air pollution including mercury emission and may cause plausibly subtle chronic health effects due to long-term low-dose exposure" (US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health). More concerning than mercury emissions on chronic health of humans, is the bioaccumulation and biomagnification of mercury. As previously mentioned, the proposed site is adjacent to the American River/Lake Natoma which is the habitat for fish, bald eagles, deer, foxes, skunks, and many other wildlife. The waterway is also used for fishing. Mercury accumulates in organisms, increasing levelso which then is transferred to higher-level organisms such as fish, bald eagles, and humans. The lnitial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration did not address the bioaccumulation and biomagnification effects of mercury emissions, which is crucial since the sight is next to a State riparian parkway.

Clearly, a crematorium should not be permitted next to a recreational riparian habitat and residential area. lts emissions will substantially degrade the visual quality of the area and will be a source of mercury bioaccumulation in the riparian organisms. I implore you to deny the conditional use permit for the above project.

Sincerely,
Tracy Wetzel