Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Funeral directors, transport provider and judges spar over county mortuary contract; commissioners table award, form stakeholder committee
Summary
After public comment and competing proposals, commissioners tabled a decision on awarding the county mortuary/transport contract to Shaffer Mortuary Services and asked stakeholders to form a committee; several funeral-home representatives alleged the vendor operating a funeral home received a disproportionate share of judge calls and urged a neutral rotation.
The court considered formal bid #1270‑25 to authorize county mortuary/transport services. Multiple funeral‑home owners, mortuary transport operators and justice‑of‑the‑peace officials addressed the court, describing competing views of the procurement and operational practices.
Several funeral‑home representatives said a vendor that now operates a funeral home had a disproportionate share of judge calls and placed that company in a position to benefit commercially; one speaker cited a county figure of about 43% of judge calls going to that vendor. Derek Joe, owner of Jobe Mortuary Transport, said he operates as an objective transport service for the county and that judges' direction to other providers is causing an appearance of impropriety. "I'm the only neutral party in Potter or Randall County," Joe said, adding he had been “threatened with arrest” while performing a contracted removal and asking that the court enforce contracts and procurement results.
Other speakers, representing competing funeral homes, urged either a rotation system or clearer procurement language to separate removals/transport from funeral‑home operations. Several commissioners said they wanted a fair process and suggested forming a stakeholder committee (including judges, public commenters and vendors) to craft a recommended process. The sheriff's office agreed to accept reports from citizens about alleged misconduct so they could be referred to the district attorney/grand‑jury process if warranted.
After extensive public comment the court moved to table the award and directed staff to convene stakeholders and return with a recommended process; the motion to table passed 5‑0.
