Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, March 8, 2011,
Item 33
33 is next.
receive briefing and give direction regarding Travis County indigent burial policy and program including the need for additional cemetery plots.
>> good morning, judge Biscoe, Commissioners, sherri fleming, and I have jim laramie with me.
the department along with transportation and natural resources has filed a great deal of backup on this item.
however, I believe that staff can give you a summary of where we are.
we spoke to you in the fall of last year and advised you of increasing demand for services in our indigent burial program.
we did talk at that time with transportation and natural resources regarding the continued life of the international cemetery and what we felt like was the time period in which we would continue to have that property for burial.
in the midst of that, we went into a new fiscal year.
we have seen an increase in the number of burials.
we're already done 88 burials so far this fiscal year.
we had hoped and been somewhat optimistic maybe that we would see a leveling off maybe at somewhere around 2007, 2008 numbers, but we have leveled off in the higher end of numbers if you look at some of the backup we've provided.
we did about 147 burials in 2009, 148 in 2010.
at 88 already this year, if you -- if we do another six months at 88, we would exceed that 148 number.
we believe we have about 80 spaces left at the international cemetery, and so from health and human services' perspective, we believe we need a stop-gap measure and our recommendation to the court today would be direction to purchasing and county legal to issue a rff for cemetery spaces until we are able to make a decision about either acquiring additional cemetery land or some other action that I think mr. Manila might be ready and willing to talk with you about.
the recommendation from health and human services right now would be to have an interim plan to acquire cemetery spaces and then I will yield to mr. Manila to talk more about the cemetery itself.
>> before we go there, though, when we've had the discussion, if my memory serves me correctly, the discussion in the fall, it was formatted where we actually had some of the providers in the community, different funeral home representatives, directors that were here present.
and, of course, we went over several different scenarios to look at some of the things that may be cost effective, even the portion of the cremation portion that was even brought up to maybe look at that and see what the cost of an example a cremation versus a burial.
did we run into situation whereby we had oversized persons that where the cost of the casket kind of exceeded if you were a normal size person.
we looked at different tiers of cost according to what was being brought to the court during that session.
however, in some discussion in this, and especially with the -- the cremation aspect of it, there was some -- some concern whereby some of the funeral directors were not able to deal with the cremation aspect but were willing to work with those particular funeral directors that allow for cremation.
and one of the considers and one of the points brought up was that the urn that where they actually put the ashes would have to be kept in place or shared for matter of reference for the persons that maybe have relatives that may want to later on come and look or claim the remains from the cremation.
so it was a lot of different moving parts, and I know we did discuss the possible purchase of real estate versus the possibility of looking at an agreement, I guess, that we have existing, I guess, either modifying agreements with some of the funeral directors that would yield to maybe a combination of both.
and I really didn't flush everything out necessarily to see exactly what -- where we are, and I guess what I'm asking now from t.n.r., are those -- and also your shop, sherri, are some of those things going to be considered at this point if we're going to look at real estate or look at a combination of both.
so that's where am at.
>> yes, sir, all of those things are still under consideration, however, cremation is not going to solve this issue.
>> I understand.
>> I think that some of the numbers we provided you indicate the number of persons that we have buried who had a family member present, and those persons we buried who have no identified family member.
as we move forward into a cremation policy if that was the court's pleasure, we certainly would not recommend cremating a body thaw didn't have a family member present.
what we have learned from our partners from the funeral directors is that they have sort of an extensive checklist of things that have to be in place in order for them to even perform a cremation at a person's request.
for example, all of the -- if we're talking about a person's children, for example, would all have to be present and in agreement in order for that to occur.
so cremation would not solve this issue, unfortunately.
the other thing we found from discussions with our partners is that depending on the size of the body, cremation is not -- might not be an appropriate solution.
so certainly a combination of internment and cremation is what we see as happening with other counties who are also required, you know, to perform this service, but cremations vernal not limit our need for burial spaces.
>> we had already moved forward with amending the policy to allow cremation or had we not?
>> we have not.
we had a work session with the court and we sort of laid all of the -- the ground work, if you will.
we did provide you in this backup a survey that was actually done by tarrant county, very well done, I might also add, that shows the prevalence of cremation through other counties such as travis.
but the court has not taken the action to direct staff to include that in the policy.
>> are you looking for such direction today?
is that contemplated in this agenda item?
>> it is not contemplated, but I think it would be very appropriate.
>> is it germane to the language, mr. Hilly?
I'll second
>> [inaudible].
>> it's out of order.
mr. Manila.
>> thank you, judge and Commissioners.
steve manila from t.n.r.
and joining me is fellows from our road maintenance division.
these are the fellows helping to take care of the international cemetery.
they've created a backup that you've had an opportunity to read, I hope.
they've looked at alternatives.
they have spoken with the operators of private cemeteries.
they can tell you how our service is different from the private sector both cost wise and the quality of what it is we do out there.
we agree wholeheartedly with sherri that we need a stop-gap measure immediately as far as being able to contract out the burial services until an alternative is agreed upon by the court.
the notion of expanding the work out at international cemetery is -- that won't do it.
we would have to find either another entity that the ability to operate and main taken a cemetery to state regulations, and there's an outline of what that might take in your backup, or finding an entirely new location, one that would meet our needs for the next 40 years.
we're talking 50 acres of land.
some hopefully not too far out where folks could still come and visit their loved ones.
but that -- in the backup you will see is a very expensive option.
nonetheless, if the court were to approve going forward with putting a firm under contract as sherry is recommending, we can go research possible sites and bring back to you some more detailed cost estimates of what it would take to open up a new cemetery under current state law and what it would take to operate and maintain that.
we anticipate it will be expensive.
to be quite honest, we would prefer outsourcing would be the way to go with the option of cremation.
but we will take whatever direction the court wants to give us.
>> there was discussion, and I'm going back to the work session that we had last year, I guess, there was some options or discussion, I guess, that actually spoke, I think steve on what you are saying looking as far as a contractual with someone that did it all.
we can do all of the above.
we can deal with the cremation, we can also deal with the burial.
everybody was not able to do that as far as the funeral directors here that came before us in the work session.
so I know we're looking at alternatives, we're looking at the situation here, but I'm still kind of concerned that whatever we end up doing expensewise, has there been an earmark dollar amount?
let's say no cremation is allowed.
let's say we stay with just the situation of burying the indigent and in a plot-type situation.
have we run the numbers, per se, if we just went totally only with that and if we even acquire 60 acres to -- to -- to actually take this out for the new burial sites, have that cost estimate been weighed and especially what we also heard was, and I mentioned this earlier and sherri also mentioned it, we were talking about the oversized person where, if I can understand that, it got to be quite expensive for -- as far as the rates are concerned to inter that person.
so I goods my concern, I'm trying to look at all the numbers as best I possibly can because this is something you are asking us to do.
and, of course, it's going to affect the budget one way or the other.
and I want to lay all the numbers on the table to ensure that what we're disclosing here today is something that we can, you know, discuss, either do further research on.
that's what I'm kind of concerned about.
>> I think y'all have provided that in the backup, right?
and the numbers are big.
>> well, I'm just saying -- I'm asking for them to disclose those numbers.
>> I think, Commissioner, the other piece that we don't have for you and I would not feel comfortable just talking numbers out, I think that's why the request for services would be very helpful to us right now because in my conversations with both purchasing and legal, we believe we can structure a rfs with very specific requests but also give the proposers some room to also offer us some alternatives.
because it is possible that while we might -- we might have some folks who would respond who would simply offer us spaces one at a time, so to speak, we also may have responders who might offer us sections of an existing cemetery.
so I think this rfs as we have discussed it thus far and we are anticipating your approval for us to go forward today, would give us an opportunity to give you more specific costs and so you could then compare those costs to the cost of acquiring and establishing a new cemetery.
but I would really not want to toss out just sort of a budge of numbers at this point because I think we have the opportunity for partners in the community to be creative to assist us with this problem.
>> but have we done enough informal investigation to find out whether there are contractors who could do the funeral service plus the burial?
that's a telephone call, right?
>> that is a telephone call.
we had not anticipated -- you are talking about doing the internment or just providing the spot that would all come together?
is that your question.
>> since we need burial plots, do we know if the accepted doors we currently contract with can provide that service and at what cost.
and I'm thinking if that's a phone call to each one of them which you can do in a matter of minutes.
I'm wondering why do an r.f.p.
without ascertaining whether or not there are vendors interested in submitting proposals.
>> and if I could jump in here judge, don ward with t.n.r.
I had a very good informal visit with cook walledden and their representative north on i-35, and their whole facility, app and during this visit was brought up that they were very agreeable, and not to step on your toes here, but they were very gradually to giving us -- agreeable to giving us -- also to handle the service, the whole, you know, process for us to do that so they were very willing, and like I said, it was informal because I wanted to find out what their burial operations were, what we might be looking at to do for our -- if we were directed to go with a new cemetery, what we would be looking at.
and in this whole process, they do have areas where they could specifically allocate to Travis County for indigent services.
>> but cook wallden is not one of our contract --
>> that's correct.
my original reason was to find out what would be involved in operations if we were to go and acquire property, what sort of process would we be looking at, t.n.r.
road maintenance, to performing and in that discussion it led to hey, I would be glad to do this, we've got all this property here and we would definitely be really willing to look and work with you guys in whatever manner they could.
had lots of area for.
>> back to my question, why isn't it a simple matter for us to contract the vendors currently under contract with us and ask them whether they are interested in providing this service?
>> we're happy to do that, judge.
this has not been a service that we sought before so our -- our process has been to follow the purchasing process as we know it to be.
so --
>> but an r.f.p.
takes time.
if there is zero interest, why would you take that time?
>> because there may be funeral -- there may be cemetery organizations separate and aparted from funeral homes who may be able to provide this service.
so there are cemeteries that are separate and apart from a funeral home.
>> have we phoned them?
>> we have not, sir.
no, we have not.
>> I just am wondering why this isn't a whole lot simpler than what I'm hearing.
I'm not saying sign a contract, I'm saying make a phone call.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> do we have an obligation under the purchasing act since it's a service that we are looking to be provided to us, it's not a professional service?
>> I'm not saying contract for it, I'm saying ascertain the level of interest.
seems to me before you spend a whole lot of time going down that road, you would want to know that at the end of it there would be a contract possibility.
if there is zero interest, why go down there anyway.
we have two our three other options to pursue.
>> I might add, judge, a lot of these funeral services, the company, they don't operate a cemetery.
so it's a little difficult as we currently -- I think we currently operate some of our vendors, they provide the funner is services, but they do not have the space to provide internment.
that's kind of a problem too because they would have to then go out and find some other place --
>> I'm not expecting them to do it for us.
if they are not in the business, they are not in the business.
instead of us speaking generally, why don't we put ourselves in a position to speak more specifically by just making a few phone calls?
it's all right to give direction to put together the r.f.p., but that will take some time.
that should be brought back to the court for approval.
if one of our directions is to pursue that, I would simplify it.
I'm having trouble figuring why vacant land we plan to use as a cemetery would cost $30,000 an acre.
seems to me that's twice what we should be able to get it for.
>> well, it could be higher or lower, judge.
somewhere where we decide the places, if it's for the total convenience of the folks that we most likely serve, anywhere west of 130 would be expensive.
so 30,000 is not out of realm of possibility.
>> my other question, there are rural churches with cemeteries and a lot of them have trouble maintaining them.
why wouldn't we contact some of them and in exchange for our maintaining the whole cemetery, we acquire part of it for our use?
>> I might address that, judge.
most of the rural cemeteries are fairly small in night, and our current site, we're experiencing where we have four to five per week now and we're going to need something larger than some of these rural cemeteries have to offer us.
they are really too small and we would be here a month, there a month and so you would have as many as five or six that you would have to coordinate somehow with.
and they are all operated by cemetery associations and sometimes their needs are a whole lot different than what we're able to accommodate.
>> but how many cemeteries have we actually inspected, investigated to make this determination?
all I'm saying it seems to me we are general -- too general to make decisions.
and I don't know that I would nay say any of these options.
I can accept a no at the end of all of them, but I don't want to start off with a no.
and the numbers I'm liking at here are huge.
we have to rule out some of the more reasonable options first, it seems to me.
because if in fact as a last resort we have to follow one of these options, the thing I'm looking at right here says we're talking real big numbers.
I would not start off here.
if we have have to end up with it.
>> that's why I was considering options.
earlier and when I was asking what would it cost, acres you are going to need for sites, but if I can recall correctly, some of the people that did direct, we're able to -- to maybe have the person
>> [inaudible] at our facility, but some of the concerns were just as we stated, not having a place to really inter them.
>> talking about a contract burial program.
a new direction for us.
>> yes.
>> in my view, I would not rule out the church option.
I can come up with one or two churches who have contacted me about maintenance stuff.
these are in rural I can't--areas, not in the city of Austin.
but if we are thinking about acquiring land for a new cemetery, in the city of Austin you have new regulations you have to.
that would be five miles out.
in the city we would be able to acquire an existing cemetery and use it?
>> right.
but a brand new one would have to be five miles outside.
I think that is what we were anticipating getting the rfp for next week, and that it would cover all of these.
so that then when we made phone calls and contacted cemeteries, funeral homes, whoever we wanted to, they would each get the same information and questions so that we would get back all these possibilities, information.
>> how much time are we giving the vendors to respond to the rf?
>> two weeks.
>> my phone calls take ten minutes.
then you write out the questions.
so you ask the same questions of each vendor.
we don't have a thousand vendors.
we contract with how many?
>> we have about 14, 15 funeral homes on the list.
but there are considerably more available in the community.
and I would say the same would be true of cemeteries.
>> we have a social worker available during this social work month that we can assign one day.
and let's say that we double the 14 that we have contracts with.
that is 28.
that is good news.
>> also we can examine other county burial outsourcing and take in an average of of their costs for the outsourcing so we at least know whether others are doing and what it costs them to outsource the burial services, correct?
that is where we got the estimate of $4400, which is by the way, 300 and change less than what it costs us to do it in house.
>> right.
>> I guess if I may, I think one of the things that the rfs will do is give us an opportunity to see who is in the community.
because I agree, we certainly can make phone calls to those people that we are aware of.
it does not work really well for those folks that we're not aware of who might have as viable an option as those folks that we contact.
and so, I think the combination of the two would be my recommendation.
because I think that what we have discussed is the opportunity for--
>> that is fine with me.
>> all right.
>> let me remind us during the computer age, in the old days when there was a phone book, you could go and find everybody in the business who wanted business.
on the internet, I'm sure there's similar information.
moving on.
the other thing we need direction on is the creamation policy.
that will take some time and agonizing, right, ms. Gearhart?
>> I think we have agonized.
we might be able to move forward a little quicker because of the back round work.
>> we want to give directions to proceed.
>> you want us to bring you back--
>> what I'm hearing, we need a policy where family members have surfaced and basically approve of cremation.
that will give us we think the coverage that we need.
that is fine with me.
>> some statutory restrictions and then funeral homes have their own policies then we have ours.
e think that is what we would need to put together.
>> can we rely on your professional judgment to give us a ?
--a draft?
>> always.
>> the last reason, the county going out and buying the land and staying in the burial business where we have been forever.
>> since the '90s.
>> for a young person like me, steven, that is forever.
>> as long as we, the motion should include all those things that we discussed today.
and not leaving out the option of the cremation along with the contract burial situation.
but also some of the similar with what the judge brought up, especially inquiring to looking at church, out of the city limits as far as burial sites, all this included in the motion.
I think you have your directions as far as the way we are going on this.
we look to hear, what did we say back in to weeks probably?
>> well--
>> what are you suggesting?
all these things, would that be enough time?
>> if we have a rfp, if we go ahead and start making the phone calls, doing the dual approach.
if we have the are.
fp, we could bring that back next week and have two weeks after that for those responses.
>> okay.
>> we need an item that is broken down into different parts.
some of these will take more time than others.
we think the cremation policy would be ready when?
two, three weeks?
>> at least two.
>> but we think that we will be able to look at telephone responses.
and talk about a rfs or rfp, ms. Purchasing agent.
so we have it back on next week, a draft rfp?
>> yeah, we will be working on that.
we will try.
>> do we need more direction than that?
that is Commissioner Davis's motion.
Commissioner Eckhardt seconds it.
now that it is in order.
>> you did say, I remember that.
>> I have to have some fun.
>> I know.
>> judge, can I make one more comment?
>> yes, sir.
>> you said we'll be in the business forever.
we will be in the business forever because we will be maintaining the interaction the cemetery year forever.
it's not something we will be able to, once we run out of our spaces in June, we will be there maintaining it in perp tuity.
>> do we have partners in helping us maintain?
>> no, ma'am.
>> I think the veterans groups--
>> we do have some private individuals coming out, about you think we are going to look at some assistance from these private groups.
>> I think it's also used a veterans day and--
>> clearly as far as maintenance we have no assistance from any entity.
>> ms. Porter, was that motion clear enough for you?
>> yes.
>> anymore discussion on the motion?
we'll have it back on next week, the parts that we should address.
thank you all very much.
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
appreciate it.
>> thank you all.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, March, 2011 2:19 PM
