HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-03-25-CSCII-minAd Hoc Crematory Study Committee 11
Minutes, Wednesday, March 25, 2026
Hybrid -Parker Room and Remote via Zoom
5:00-6:15 PM
The meeting was called to order by Joe Pato at 5:03 PM.
Roll call was conducted, and quorum was confirmed.
Committee Members Present
• Joe Pato (SB Liaison and non-voting Chair pro -tem), Archan Basu (remote), Mike Harris, Rabbi
David Lerner (remote), Joseph Su, Jillian Tung, Judy Zola
• Absent: Jyoti Puri
Liaisons / Guests
• Anil Ahuja — Appropriations Committee (remote), Lisah Rhodes — Capital Expenditures
Committee
1) Approve minutes for 2/18/26 meeting
Approval of prior meeting minutes deferred due to lack of prepared draft.
2) Review proposal for gathering community input via Zoom meeting — Mike Harris
Mike provided an overview of the community listening session he moderated.
• Attendance details:
o —60 participants at peak
o —46 participants at the end of 90 minutes
o Over 100 unique attendees in total
• An AI -generated summary of the session had previously been circulated.
Key Themes from Community Input
• Strong demand for cremation services, particularly among Dharmic communities (Hindu,
Sikh, Buddhist, Jain).
• Importance of:
o Availability within required timeframes after death
o Ability to perform Havan (open -flame) ceremonies
o Family presence and witnessing of cremation
• Limitations of existing facilities:
o Mount Auburn and Newton Cemeteries do not permit open flame and limit ceremony
practices.
o Some facilities have limited weekend availability.
• Testimony acknowledged that some residents outside Dharmic communities expressed no
difficulty using existing crematories.
• Committee noted that the listening session represented a self-selecting population, not a
town -wide referendum.
Additional Research Shared
• Mike shared follow-up research on:
o Newton Cemetery
o Mount Auburn Cemetery
o Cremation Society of New Hampshire
• Findings showed:
o Specialized services exist but often require long-distance travel.
o Even specialized providers face availability constraints.
o Overall volume of Dharmic cremations remains relatively low regionally.
Agreement on Reporting
• Consensus that:
o Community voices must be accurately reflected in the final report.
o Input should be contextualized with existing financial, legal, environmental, and
capacity data.
• Mike volunteered to create a condensed narrative summary of listening session input (to be
used in the report or appendix).
3) Drafting a report
Judy presented a consolidated summary of committee feedback using Al assistance.
Three primary options emerging in prior work were reiterated:
1. Crematory adjacent to or connected with existing Westview Cemetery building
2. Crematory elsewhere on Westview Cemetery property
3. Recommendation not to proceed with building a crematory at this time
Discussion emphasized:
• Importance of factual accuracy
• Clear citation of data sources
• Identification of assumptions where projections are used
Significant discussion focused on:
• Disagreement over data interpretation (e.g., cremation rate percentages)
• How to transparently reflect differences of opinion
Chair emphasized the report does not need to be unanimous.
Agreed approach:
• Primary recommendation with clearly identified dissenting or alternative viewpoints,
similar to a majority/minority opinion structure.
The Chair requested volunteers to synthesize prior written committee responses into a cohesive
narrative reflecting areas of consensus and divergence.
• Lead Author: Judy Zola
• Support: Archan Basu, Jillian Tung
Scope:
• Synthesize —4.5 pages of raw member input
• Identify themes, rationale, and minority views
• Inform (but not determine) final committee recommendation
Draft to be distributed with the agenda for the next meeting.
Assignment of Report Drafting
• Judy appointed as primary author ("holding the pen").
• Committee members to provide concise written input for their respective areas:
o Mike & Archan: Financial analysis
o Jillian (with Jyoti): Regulatory, environmental, legal, and public health analysis
• Supporting materials and prior subgroup reports to be collected centrally for Judy's use.
4) Adjourn — 6:12pm
Next Meeting
Date: May 7
Time: 5:00 PM
Format: Hybrid (in-person with Zoom option)
Expected Duration: 60-75 minutes
Purpose: Review draft report and discuss any additional community input received by the April 17
comment deadline.
Minutes submitted by Joseph Pato, chair pro -tem.
Approved 5/7/2026