Tulare supervisors declare intent to assume trusteeship of Tulare Public Cemetery District

The Tulare County Board of Supervisors voted 4-0 to declare its intent to appoint itself as the board of trustees for the Tulare Public Cemetery District and to initiate the required public-hearing process, citing recent trustee resignations and an insurer’s warning that coverage would be terminated unless board stability is restored.

County staff described the measure as an intent vote that would trigger a public hearing within 60 days, not an immediate takeover. Mr. Sotelo, a county staff member presenting the item, said the action is proposed because three of the district’s five trustees resigned, “leaving the Tulare Public Cemetery District without a quorum to continue orderly operations of the district,” and because the district’s insurer, the Golden State Risk Management Authority, “intends to terminate coverage, rendering the district unable to continue operations unless it can demonstrate board stability.”

The nut of the proposal is procedural: if the Board of Supervisors adopts a resolution of intent, the county must publish notice and mail written notice at least 10 days before the hearing. Only written protests from registered voters in the district will be counted; if written protests are received from 10% or more of registered voters, the supervisors may either terminate the proceedings or, by a four-fifths vote, appoint themselves as trustees if the change is necessary to protect public health, safety and welfare. If fewer than 10% of registered voters submit written protests, the board could install itself as the trustees following the hearing.

Public commenters at the meeting described long-running governance and maintenance problems at the cemetery and differing views over whether threats of violence toward staff had occurred. Linda Malloy, who identified herself as a longtime volunteer, said during public comment, “I’m the threat. I’ve been stalking the manager. I’ve been harassing the manager. I have threatened the manager’s life. I am the threat.” Other speakers disputed the board’s characterization of threats. Xavier Abala, who said he had served on the cemetery board since 2018, told supervisors, “It’s a lie,” referring to the claim of threats, and said service problems such as broken headstones, gopher holes and overgrown grass had driven complaints to the board.

Former trustee Charlie Ramos, who said he resigned, described public interruptions and internal failures of compliance including missing filings and training for some trustees. He told the supervisors the district had become unworkable and said placing the district under the county’s trusteeship would allow a new, functioning board to be seated in the future.

Supervisor Pete McCarrie (first reference: Supervisor Pete McCarrie) moved to declare the board’s intent to assume trusteeship subject to conditions spelled out during the meeting: the cemetery district must accept liability for past, present and future liabilities; reimburse the county for staff time and costs incurred while the county provides services; county counsel will serve as legal counsel while the county has trusteeship; the Board of Supervisors will form an ad hoc committee to select new trustees; and no person who served on the cemetery board within the prior five years may be reappointed by this board. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Shuckling and passed 4-0, with Supervisor Townsend absent.

County staff outlined procedural details to the supervisors: notices must be published in a newspaper of general circulation and mailed at least 10 days before the hearing, protests must be written and submitted to the clerk of the board before or at the hearing (email and oral protests will not be counted), and any decision by the supervisors to serve as trustees would be subject to the Brown Act for public meetings and could later be reversed under the same statutory authority.

The board also reported out from closed session that it directed legal counsel to defend and authorize the defense of individually named defendants in Catherine Taylor v. County of Tulare (Tulare County Superior Court case VCU 321,660). That direction passed by the same 4-0 margin with Supervisor Townsend absent.

Next steps specified by staff and the board: the county clerk will publish and mail hearing notices as required, the board’s ad hoc selection committee will begin work if the supervisors move forward after the hearing, and the public will be able to submit written protests and testify at the scheduled hearing within the statutory timeline.

The action does not itself transfer day-to-day management; supervisors and staff emphasized the hearing is the next formal step and that any trusteeship would be temporary until the board either divests itself or installs a new trustee board that meets governance and compliance requirements.