The interior of the Oak Hill Cemetery Mausoleum, built in 1917. The City of Lawrence is the caretaker of the mausoleum, where the remains of approximately 50 people are entombed.

Decades ago, when Robert Asher went to visit the mausoleum where his mother and grandparents were entombed, he found a padlock on the door.

The once-grand Oak Hill Cemetery Mausoleum, built in 1917, was falling into disrepair. Instead of restoring the structure, the City of Lawrence caretakers planned to move out the remains of those entombed.

“Looking back on it and thinking about it, I’m really very disappointed in the way it was all handled,” said Asher, 74.

Dozens of Lawrence families, including the Ashers, had purchased space in the 104-crypt mausoleum. At the time, they expected the white stone building — which included a chapel space with stained glass — to be their family’s final resting place.

According to city officials, part of the problem may be that the fund conveyed to the city from the Ohio company that built the mausoleum was never enough to cover all its maintenance.

Today, an iron grate is bolted over the stained-glass window, where all but a few of the green and cobalt panels are missing. Wedged between the grate and a length of chicken wire is the long-dead body of a squirrel.

The interior of the Oak Hill Cemetery Mausoleum, built in 1917. The City of Lawrence is the caretaker of the mausoleum, where the remains of approximately 50 people are entombed.

Inside the mausoleum, cracked paint covers the ceiling and a confetti of debris speckles the floor — dust, paint chips and fallen pieces of crypt-facing meant to mark the place of the deceased.

Diane Williams, 74, had seven relatives interred in the crypt between 1919 and 1966. Williams said she thinks the mausoleum should have been better kept.

“I would think (the city) should have maintained it,” said Williams, now of Fort Collins, Colo. “That would be my first thought, because I understand they were supposed to be doing that. They fell down on the job.”

The city is sued

The Oak Hill Cemetery Mausoleum is pictured March 28, 2017.

A judge also thought so. In 1951, Lawrence residents — including Williams’ and Asher’s relatives — who owned crypts sued the city for not maintaining the mausoleum in accordance with an ordinance adopted by the City Commission in 1915.

The ordinance had set up a mausoleum fund, and the judge ordered the city to expend its entirety “for the immediate repair and restoration” of the mausoleum. It was further ordered that if those funds were not enough, the city must acquire funds from “any other source available,” including donations or from the crypt owners themselves.

Following the court ruling, it was evidently the expectation of the various crypt owners involved in the suit that lasting changes would be made. Asher’s grandfather, Henry Asher, a crypt owner and also the attorney in the case, was interred in the mausoleum when he died. Three other members of the Asher family were also interred, all between 1955 and 1963, according to cemetery records. Williams and her sister, Suzanne Lutz, of Lawrence, had at least seven relatives, the Daltons and Dinsmoors, interred.

Similar to cemetery plots, the mausoleum is owned by those who purchased the crypts, or their descendants. The city is caretaker of the mausoleum and in charge of the mausoleum fund.

What happened following the court order is unclear. Cemetery supervisor Mitch Young, who has been with the city for 20 years, said he was not familiar with the order.

However, Young said the city has not neglected the mausoleum, and that the building has been kept structurally sound. He said it’s common for a mausoleum to eventually be sealed, and that the city has done exterior maintenance, including replacing the roof and doing some tuck-pointing on the outside.

“The building itself is fine,” Young said. “… We keep any growth from growing on it. If anybody vandalizes it, we clean it up … As for any other maintenance, no.”

As caretaker, the city also made the decision to seal the mausoleum to protect it from vandalism, but Young said it can be opened for relatives if requested. Since he began his position in 1997, Young said no relatives of those entombed have requested to enter.

A 102-year-old deal

At the center of the debate is the arrangement the city made with the Ohio Mausoleum company, which approached the city with a deal in 1915 to handle the building’s maintenance.

When the deal was negotiated, city commissioners were at first hesitant to be left with the responsibility, according to the Journal-World’s archives. But Ohio Mausoleum representatives argued that the city, because it was guaranteed to be around in perpetuity, was the best entity for the job. Eventually, the ordinance was passed that outlined how the mausoleum would be managed.

The ordinance states that $2,000 conveyed to the city by Ohio Mausoleum would be used to purchase municipal bonds, and the interest on those bonds would be spent exclusively for the building’s “insurance, upkeep and maintenance.” If necessary, it allowed the city to collect “proportionate” funds from crypt owners. Proceeds from the sale of the crypts would be remitted to Ohio Mausoleum, but the city could charge a $5 fee to open and close crypts, and $5 for use of the chapel for services.

Contracts signed by those who purchased crypts from Ohio Mausoleum were to reference the arrangement.

However, the interest didn’t amount to much. At the time of the 1951 lawsuit, there was approximately $700 in interest accumulated, according to the court order. At the end of last year, the mausoleum fund had a balance of $4,259, according to finance director Bryan Kidney.

There isn’t an estimate of how much it would cost to restore the mausoleum, but Young said it would surely be more than is in the mausoleum fund.

“As a maintenance person with this type of situation, I don’t know what we could have done on the inside without spending possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars,” Young said. “That’s why we gave folks the option to move their loved ones out of there at no expense, and a lot of people did choose that.”

Repairs and moved remains

The issues, however, may go beyond money.

Young said part of the problem is the material that was used to seal the crypts. He said some were faced with “man-made” marble, which he said in some cases has turned almost to dust. The catacombs themselves are made of concrete, and some marble facings have fallen to the floor and shattered.

The city maintains three cemeteries, including some newer mausoleums in Memorial Park Cemetery. Young noted that these days, no variety of marble is allowed, including for use as headstones.

“It’s just the type of material it is,” Young said. “We don’t allow marble anymore for a reason, because you can’t read them after a while.”

At one point, there were about 70 people entombed in the Oak Hill Mausoleum, with interment dates ranging from 1918 to 1966, according to cemetery records. But Young said that with no plan to restore the mausoleum, the tactic turned to moving remains out.

Young said that caskets or urns were only removed from the mausoleum at the request of surviving family members. He added the city has not charged for the plots or the opening and closing fees, although a headstone would have to be paid for by the families.

Young said 48 caskets or urns remain in the mausoleum today. However, current mausoleum records online today indicate that the remains of 63 people are still in the mausoleum. A complete list of the remains that have been moved is not currently available, and the Journal-World wasn’t able to get verification from the city as to whether the Asher’s remains are still located in the mausoleum.

However, Asher, who lives in Kansas City, Mo., said that the day he found the mausoleum locked up — roughly 30 years ago — the supervisor at the time told him the urns holding the cremated remains of his family members had been moved from the mausoleum and buried in the cemetery. Asher said he’d be very disappointed if they were in fact moved without his permission.

“I don’t know what my recourse is, if I have any recourse,” Asher said.

Williams said at some point her family arranged to move the Dalton and Dinsmoor remains out of the mausoleum due to its disrepair. They were buried in a plot outside the mausoleum, though records indicate they are both in the mausoleum and buried just west of it. In hindsight, Williams said she would have preferred to have left them in the mausoleum.

“I’m sure that they said they were going to tear it down, that that was why they were moved,” Williams said. “Because I never heard anything about my folks deciding to move them, just on a whim.”

The city’s
responsibility

Following inquiries by the Journal-World, the city is in the process of determining whether it is responsible for additional maintenance of the mausoleum. City Attorney Toni Wheeler said her office is reviewing the city’s obligations under the ordinance and the 1951 court order.

“I imagine that we’ll be able to make a recommendation going forward, based on those documents,” Wheeler said. She noted that the city is in the process of getting the 1915 ordinance delivered from its archives.

Asher said he’d be very glad if the city were to arrange for the restoration of the mausoleum. If he were to also find out that his family members’ remains are still in the mausoleum, he would like to set things as originally intended.

“I have my brother’s cremains here in my home, and I would really like to inter them along with the rest of my family,” Asher said. “I would want them re-established. My grandfather brought that lawsuit; I’m sure that would be his thoughts.”