Hello again everyone.
I guess I missed an issue this morning when I was writing my earlier post.

Steve pointed out that there is a locationless cache dealing with the same
monuments.  I did not know it existed, and had never even looked at a
locationless cache before today.  I have been thinking about it all day, and
have decided that even if I had known, I still would have gone ahead with my
virtual caches.  I have 2 reasons for this:
#1) I view a monument cache as something everybody should visit and be
allowed to log.  A locationless cache sends the opposite signal -- sorry,
but that monument was 'used up' by the one person who visited it in June,
2002.  There are potentially thousands of cachers who may get the chance to
log a virtual cache here.  Each should be allowed his/her own moment of
triumph, even if the cache is super easy.
#2) If cache redundancy is a reason for archival of a cache, the
locationless cache would be the one to be archived anyway.  I set up the
Madonna cache in Lexington 3 months before the locationless cache was
created.
#3) The issue will disappear in a couple months anyway, because each of the
12 monuments will be posted on the locationless cache and it will be closed.

Now, I have a question for you all:
The certificate of accomplishment is something I see in caches around my
neck of the woods.  I save them in my PC with my pictures.  The password is
intended to keep people from opening the document that have not visited the
cache.  The certificate does not, however, do ANYTHING for visit
verification.  Visit verification for this cache is now done either by
picture or email.  Is the purpose of the certificate too confusing?  Some
cachers around here like collecting them, but this cache is not in my
locale.  Do you think I should remove the certificate?

-Brett