Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cemetery Boundary Realignment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Little Butte and Pioneer cemetery boards ask Jefferson County to study boundary realignment
Summary
Representatives of Little Butte and Pioneer cemetery districts asked Jefferson County commissioners to explore redrawing cemetery district boundaries after finance and capacity data showed a large tax-base disparity, and county staff agreed to research statutory process and next steps.
Dean Hancock, chairman of the Little Butte Cemetery board, told the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners that Little Butte is running short of burial plots and operating funds and proposed a boundary realignment with the adjacent Pioneer Cemetery district to balance tax bases and long-term capacity.
“We passed an override levy for for a 2 year override, which will generate approximately $60,000 in 2 years,” Hancock said, describing limited near‑term revenue for Little Butte and listing a sprinkler bid of about $200,000 for the existing cemetery.
The county’s treasurer provided assessed‑value and tax‑revenue figures during the discussion: Pioneer’s assessed base was reported as roughly $1.95 billion with annual taxes to Pioneer of about $182,170.86, while Little Butte’s annual taxes were reported as about $36,006.91, accounting for the agencies’ large revenue difference.
County staff and commissioners discussed legal steps for changing cemetery district boundaries under Idaho law. A county official read from Idaho Code 27‑1‑12 and described the practical path: the two districts would develop a proposal, hold a public meeting with advertised notice, and, if there is no significant opposing feedback, the change could proceed without a special election. County staff said they would confirm procedural and dollar‑threshold details and report back.
County staff and the two cemetery representatives outlined operational pressures driving the request. Little Butte’s volunteer sexton reported roughly 60–70 burials per year and estimated about 300–413 plots currently available; at current rates that translates into about six years before existing plots are exhausted. Pioneer reported a larger remaining capacity: an estimate of decades (tens of years) of remaining plots under current burial rates.
Commissioners and staff advised a collaborative approach: the two districts should meet, refine an annexation/realignment plan that documents assessed value moved and any effect on the other district’s fund, and then advertise a joint public meeting under the cited state code. Staff said they would examine the statutory limits (including a cited $5,000,000 assessed‑value threshold mentioned in the code text) and return with formal guidance in roughly two weeks.
The commissioners did not take a formal vote on redistricting at the meeting; the outcome was direction to staff to confirm the legal process and timelines and to help schedule the required joint meeting and public notice.
