Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Cemetery Operations topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Study shows Pleasanton Pioneer Cemetery runs annual deficit; commission backs shifting to a community‑amenity model

Pleasanton Commission · May 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A consultant told the commission Pleasanton Pioneer Cemetery runs about a $150,000 annual operating deficit, carries substantial deferred obligations from pre‑need sales, and recommended stopping new casket sales and right‑sizing contracts; the commission voted to recommend a ‘community amenity’ approach to City Council.

A consultant’s operational study presented May 8 found Pleasanton Pioneer Cemetery is operating at a significant deficit and carries outstanding service obligations from prior pre‑need sales, and the commission recommended pursuing a community‑amenity model to reduce ongoing losses.

Ellis Sloan Consulting Group principal Stephanie Sloan told the commission the 5.2‑acre Pleasanton Pioneer site dates to 1850 and is now a low‑volume cemetery that averaged about 31 burials per year over recent years. Sloan said the cemetery’s three principal contracts and operating model currently generate roughly $200,000 in annual revenue while resulting contractor and maintenance costs leave the enterprise with about a $150,000 annual deficit.

Sloan identified a large legacy liability from pre‑need contracts: since sales resumed in 2010 the city entered about 385 contracts, with initial sale prices totaling about $730,000 and an estimated current cost to deliver those promised services of roughly $515,000. Sloan also said there is a $500,000 loan from the city general fund outstanding to the cemetery enterprise fund.

Recommended approach and rationale: Sloan said the most pragmatic near‑term approach is to “right‑size” operations and shift the cemetery toward a community‑amenity model. Major components she outlined include pausing new casket sales, focusing sales on cremation interments (the cemetery already has 88 available cremation graves), consolidating from multiple vendors to fewer or to a city+partner model to reduce per‑service activation costs (for example rental of backhoes), and leveraging small‑scale fundraising and historical programming to increase local engagement and revenue.

Sloan cautioned there is limited ability to sell enough new full‑body plots quickly because of land constraints and market preferences (the city estimates about 72% of local dispositions are cremations). She proposed keeping some cemetery capital funds invested to help cover inflation and the deferred‑service obligations and suggested the commission consider options to forgive or repay the $500,000 intra‑city loan using existing cemetery capital if council directs.

Public comment: Roy Smith of VFW Post 6298 and a longtime resident urged continued, visible care of the grounds and memorials: “Keep the landscaping pristine… these are our dead people,” Roy said. Another resident said volunteer efforts and steady groundskeeping have already improved the site.

Commission direction and vote: Commissioners debated three options (maintain current services with ongoing general fund subsidy; focus aggressively on sales to become an enterprise; or shift to a community‑amenity model). A commissioner moved to shift to the community‑amenity model (city+partner) and the commission approved a recommendation to forward that option to City Council for a July hearing. Staff and the consultant said the community‑amenity approach produces the lowest projected deficit in the consultant’s scenarios but will not immediately eliminate the shortfall; follow‑up work for council will include refined partner conversations, contract options, and funding scenarios.

Next steps: staff will include the commission’s recommendation in materials for City Council and continue refining costs, partner feasibility and options to address the prepaid contract liabilities and the outstanding intra‑city loan.