Tulare County supervisors declare intent to appoint themselves trustees of Tulare Public Cemetery District

The Tulare County Board of Supervisors on a motion passed 4-0 declared its intent to appoint itself as the board of trustees for the Tulare Public Cemetery District and directed staff to begin a public hearing process after three of the district's five trustees resigned and the district's insurer warned it may terminate coverage.

County staff attorney Israel Sotelo, speaking to the board, said the action would be taken under state law and is intended to restore stable governance. "California health and safety code section 90 26 authorizes the board of supervisors of the principal county to appoint itself as the board of trustees for a public cemetery district," Sotelo told the supervisors, and he summarized three components of the requested action: declare intent to appoint the board of supervisors as trustees, hold a public hearing within 60 days, and publish and mail notice of the hearing pursuant to "government code section 60 61."

The item was prompted, Sotelo said, after three of the five Tulare Public Cemetery District trustees submitted resignations, leaving the district without a quorum. He also told the board the district's insurer, the Golden State Risk Management Authority (GSRMA), had notified the district that it intended to terminate coverage because of the board instability.

The proposed resolution of intent does not itself transfer authority; it sets in motion a public hearing and protest process the board must complete before taking control. Sotelo described the hearing process: notice must be published at least 10 days before the hearing, written protests from registered voters within the district will be considered, and if 10% or more of registered voters file written protests the board may either terminate the proceedings or, by a four-fifths vote, appoint itself as trustees if the change is necessary to protect public health, safety and welfare. If fewer than 10% protest in writing, the board may install itself as trustees after the hearing.

Public commenters at the meeting gave sharply different accounts of the district's problems. Linda Malloy, who said she has volunteered at the cemetery for years, told the board, "I'm the threat. I've been stalking the manager. I've been harassing the manager. I have threatened the manager's life." Malloy said she had been on audit committees and had repeatedly questioned spending and maintenance and that she feared the cemetery could be lost if governance problems persist.

Charlie Ramos, a recent trustee who tendered his resignation, told the board he left after being targeted during an impromptu town-hall meeting and after repeated interruptions and leaks of sensitive information. Ramos said some required trustee filings and trainings had not been completed. "When I saw the proposal before you for the board to take over, it's in my opinion well founded," Ramos said.

Xavier Abala, who said he has served on the cemetery board since 2018 and is among the resigning or departed trustees, told supervisors he disputed the county staff's assertion that credible threats of violence had made the district ungovernable. "There is a lie," Abala said of the threat claims. "Those meetings are still recorded and still online for people to watch. It's a lie."

Supervisor Pete McCarrie (motion maker) told the board he did not want the county to be on the hook for past liabilities and proposed conditions should the county proceed: that the cemetery district accept all past, present and future liability, that the district reimburse the county for staff time and costs, that an ad hoc county committee select new trustees, that county counsel provide legal services while the county oversees the district, and that no board member who served within the last five years be immediately reappointed. Supervisor Shuckling seconded the motion. Supervisor McCarty emphasized the county's takeover would not be a quick fix: "If we take this over, don't expect it to be done and everything perfect in a month. It's gonna take a long time," he said.

Board counsel and staff clarified procedural points: the Brown Act would apply to any meetings held by the supervisors acting as the district trustees, agendas would still need to be posted at district offices, and the board could later divest itself of trustee responsibility under the same code section that allows it to assume the duties. Sotelo also reiterated that protests must be written to be counted; email and verbal protests do not qualify.

The board voted on the motion to declare intent and to require the public hearing and notice steps described by staff. The motion passed 4-0 with Supervisor Townsend not voting because he was not in attendance.

The board did not immediately appoint itself trustees; the action starts the notice and hearing process required by state law. A public hearing must be held within 60 days of the resolution of intent, at which registered voters in the district may submit written protests. The board will consider those protests before any final appointment or termination of proceedings.

A schedule for the hearing and details on how to submit written protests were not provided at the meeting and were described by staff as steps to follow in implementing the resolution of intent.