Story originally printed in the Holmen Courier or online at www.holmencourier.com
Published - Thursday, March 06, 2008
Cross in crosshairs: Resident claims Holmen’s hilltop cross violates Constitution
 Even a half mile away at the BP station on Holmen Drive, the cross on Star Hill makes a very visible landmark. Now the landmark is being targeted as unconstitutional. Photo by Randy Erickson |
First Amendment issues of separation of church and state have been raised about the lighting of a cross on village property on Holmen’s Star Hill. Eric Barnes, who moved to Holmen 18 months ago, said he believes it doesn’t belong on public property.
A long-standing Holmen tradition since the 1950s, the star/cross is maintained by the Holmen Lions Club. Star Hill is such a part of Holmen’s heritage, it is a prominent part of the village’s logo, which shows the star and the giant flag that flies atop the hill.
The property the star/cross stands on belongs to the village and the electricity is paid for by the village, according to Village President John Chapman.
Barnes, an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, said he objects to a religious symbol being located on public property. “There are multiple problems. To me, it looks like a giant burning cross. It’s a huge thing up there.”
Barnes said he spoke with Village Administrator Catherine Schmit the week before last and she told him it was operated by the Lions Club and they could switch the cross back to a star and that she would call them, but it would be a while before anything happens because of all the snow on the hill.
On Tuesday, Barnes said he had not heard back from her. Schmit had been out on sick leave last week.
Peter Tabor, secretary of the Lions Club, said he had not heard anything about the complaint.
“If they want to put it on a front lawn or a church, that’s fine with me,” Barnes said. “I’m not a lawyer, but you can’t put one denomination’s symbol up on public property. If the city is footing the bill, I’m going to be extra upset.”
Actually, the village does pay for the electricity to light the star/cross and the flag atop Star Hill, Chapman said. The cross is only lit during Lent, then converted back to the star.
While the star and cross have been a fixture for decades on the hill, the village has only owned it for about five years. Chapman said the village bought the 38 acres of hilltop property in part as a location for a new water reservoir and in part to preserve the natural beauty.
This is the first time the village has had a complaint about the cross since the village bought the property, Chapman said.
The village is “dealing with the situation right now,” Chapman said, although he didn’t want to elaborate on what that meant. In fact, he was hesitant to talk about the issue at all.
“It’s a very emotional issue. That’s why I’m just trying to keep the lid on it right now,” Chapman said. “I don’t want to fan the flames on anything.”
Barnes said he hopes something gets done soon. He said he is talking to other communities and organizations to see what might be done. “I’m tired of taking this stuff lying down,” he said.
The Freedom from Religion Foundation agreed with Barnes, although he has not contacted them. “There has never been a decision by a court upholding a cross on public property except in the most temporary basis (three days maximum),” said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the foundation.
The cross is a critical symbol of Christianity, she said. The star “could be recognized as commemorating Christmas and is equally dubious,” she added.
“There’s all kinds of things that are being done wrong,” Gaylor said. “Not only placing it, storing it, lighting it, giving it maximum exposure. They’re not putting up different items for other denominations. They are just putting up one denomination. It sends a message of exclusion. Why is it important to them to violate the Constitution? I don’t think any combination of state and church is insignificant.”
Gaylor went on to say that even if a private taxpayer foots the electric and maintenance bills, it would not remedy the problem of having a religious symbol on public property. “This should not be on public property, period,” Gaylor said.
Village Trustee Ryan Olson disagreed with Barnes. “Next week, I’ll turn 35 and its been up there since I’ve been alive and if I have anything to say about it, it’ll stay up there,” Olson said. “It’s a landmark in our village. It’s something people recognize our community by. It’s a source of community pride.
“To me, it’s the same argument of why we say, ‘In God we trust’ on our coins and money and say ‘one nation, under God’ when we pledge allegiance. The country was founded on these principles.
“Unfortunately, we’ll get snagged in a situation like La Crosse did a few years ago with the 10 Commandments thing.”
Chapman said there are some similarities between the Holmen cross situation and the wrangling over the La Crosse commandments, which sit on park property in downtown La Crosse.
La Crosse settled the legal issues over the 10 Command-ments monument by selling a small part of the park to a civic group. Selling the land is “a possibility,” Chapman said.
“Whatever we do up there is going to be an additional expense to the village,” he said. “It will be an expense one way or another.”
Contact Randy Erickson at randy.erickson@lee.net or
Jo Anne Killeen at joanne.killeen@lee.net.
All stories copyright 2006 Holmen Courier and other attributed sources.