Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cemetery Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County legal review finds authority to maintain Mount Hope Cemetery; court to verify perpetual-care trusts before broad action
Summary
Legal counsel told the court that Dimmit County likely has statutory authority to maintain Mount Hope Cemetery because it was dedicated in 1885 and exceeds the 50-year threshold; commissioners voted to table broader countywide maintenance until staff verifies whether any plots carry perpetual-care trusts.
A county attorney’s consultant told the Dimmit County Commissioners Court that the county likely has statutory authority to use public funds and county labor to maintain Mount Hope Cemetery because the site was dedicated for public burial in 1885 and therefore exceeds the 50‑year threshold in the statute.
"We did find is that the county does in fact have authority under the section on the second page of that packet ... section 7.13.028, county care of cemetery older than 50 years," said Natalie Lewis of Brinker Keith Franklin, who presented the firm’s review to the court. Lewis said the statute allows county maintenance "for purposes of historical preservation or public health, safety, or welfare," unless the cemetery is a perpetual‑care cemetery or is maintained by a religious or fraternal organization.
Public commenter Gonzales warned the court that the item should be treated cautiously, saying he feared Mount Hope might be a perpetual‑care cemetery and that the county could face third‑party litigation unless indemnities and trust status were checked. "My concern with item 3.21 is that we can't get around the exceptions that are contained in the code ... one of it's a perpetual care cemetery," Gonzales said.
Lewis said county research and a deed provided to the court show Mount Hope’s public dedication in 1885 and that staff had not located a perpetual‑care trust or endowment for Mount Hope in the materials reviewed. Commissioners noted, however, that some local cemeteries may pay private contractors for maintenance and asked staff to confirm whether those contracts or trusts exist.
The court agreed to table broader action and directed staff to verify whether Mount Hope or any other county cemeteries have perpetual‑care trusts or are otherwise ineligible under the statute before authorizing county maintenance or inmate-labor involvement. The matter will return after the legal and factual checks are complete.
