In local government, the best solutions are often born from conflict. That seems to be the case in Potter County, where what started as a heated dispute among funeral homes over county transportation contracts has turned into a model of cooperation and compromise.
Just two weeks ago, the Potter County Commissioners Court witnessed an uncomfortable standoff between several funeral home operators, each concerned about fairness and competition in how the county handles the transportation and storage of human remains. Now, those same businesses have come together to design a more transparent, equitable system — one that could save taxpayers money, reduce tensions, and ensure families get the service they deserve.
How It All Began: A Contract in Question
Before the September 22 Commissioners Court meeting, Potter County had put out a request for bids for transporting and storing human remains. This is standard practice: counties often contract out these services to private businesses that handle removals, especially when a death occurs outside a hospital setting or when the deceased is indigent.
This year, the contract was awarded to Shafer Mortuary Services, owned by Eric Shafer. But the decision quickly met resistance from other funeral homes, who appeared in court to voice objections.
Shafer, who has bid for the county contract for several years, said he was surprised by the backlash. “Other services had also had the opportunity to bid,” he said, questioning why his company’s successful bid was being protested now.
The issue, as explained by Derek Jobe of Jobe Mortuary Transport, LLC — who held the previous year’s contract — had less to do with the bidding process and more to do with how Shafer’s business had changed.
“All the funeral homes in town used them for removal and transport services and various other things,” Jobe said, “but then when they became a funeral home, other funeral homes couldn’t or didn’t want to use them anymore because now they’re competition.”
That change created an inherent conflict of interest: a company that both transported bodies for the county and operated as a funeral home could, intentionally or not, end up with an advantage in securing families’ business.
The Ethical Dilemma
One major concern raised was the potential solicitation of grieving families. Funeral directors like Cindy Rowley of Cox-Rowley Funeral Home shared real examples. Rowley told the commissioners that some families who initially wanted to use her funeral home ultimately chose Shafer Mortuary because their loved one’s body was already there following a county transport.
This put other funeral homes at a disadvantage. Even if Shafer wasn’t directly soliciting families, the convenience of having the deceased already in their care could sway decisions at a time when emotions are high and logistics matter.
Beyond that, some funeral homes questioned whether the county’s Justices of the Peace (JPs) were properly following contract terms when calling for transport services. Several alleged that JPs were favoring Shafer Mortuary, sometimes bypassing the contracted service provider.
Justice of the Peace Robert Taylor (Precinct 2) pushed back against that accusation. He clarified that he only called Shafer when no funeral home had yet been selected by the family — and in those cases, Shafer had offered to provide transport “for free to the county.”
The comments highlighted a systemic issue: without clear, consistent policy, even well-intentioned officials could make decisions that appeared unfair or inconsistent.
Turning Conflict Into Collaboration
Recognizing that the situation couldn’t continue as-is, the Potter County Commissioners directed all involved funeral homes to meet and work out a better system. The effort was led by Bart Boxwell of Boxwell Brothers Funeral Directors, who coordinated discussions among competitors that don’t often share the same table.
By the time of the October 14 Commissioners Court meeting, the group had done what many might have thought impossible: they had agreed on a new, shared approach.
A New Policy for Fairness and Transparency
At that meeting, Deputy County Attorney Jackson Latimer presented a new policy for the court’s consideration. Rather than a single company holding the transportation contract, the county would move to a rotation system.
“The policy that’s being presented today for the court to consider — the way it would operate is the court would adopt a policy to rotate transportation services,” Latimer said. “The transportation services would apply to be on this list, and then the JPs would call the transport company that was up for that time period.”
Under this plan, each approved transport provider would get an equal opportunity to handle calls, ensuring no single company monopolizes the work. The rotation would also help prevent conflicts of interest and perceptions of favoritism.
Importantly, the policy distinguishes between cases the county is legally obligated to cover and those it is not. Latimer clarified that the county would continue to pay only for transports related to indigent cases or autopsies ordered by a Justice of the Peace. For other cases, transport companies would bill the appropriate funeral home or family directly.
This, Latimer said, would reduce unnecessary county expenses — taking “a little off the taxpayers,” as Boxwell later put it.
Building Trust Through Communication
The policy also includes provisions to ensure fairness and transparency in communication with families. Latimer explained that transporters would be given a list of pre-approved funeral homes to share with families, ensuring that no one provider gets an unfair advantage simply because they happened to handle the transport.
Boxwell, speaking on behalf of the group, said the funeral homes were united behind the plan.
“Just like any of these other general directors or transport agents, I think I’ve got a signed kind of agreement of how we’re going to handle our transport services,” he said. “We’re going to communicate well, and I think I’d love to see a trial time of a year on letting these transport services rotate.”
He also emphasized the importance of regular communication to prevent misunderstandings.
“We’ll communicate and get together every three months,” Boxwell said. “If there’s any ‘he said-she said’ stuff, we can address it. I feel like we ought to give this thing a shot.”
The plan doesn’t just promote fairness — it builds accountability. Each service provider will have to uphold professional standards, knowing their peers will be part of ongoing evaluations.
Addressing Legal Concerns
There was some discussion about whether transport services needed special licenses to operate under this system. Latimer said his office reviewed that question in detail and found no such requirement.
“The transport services are not required to have a license for the services they’re performing,” he said, noting that the concern had been cleared up after reviewing research from November.
With those legal questions settled and broad support from both the funeral homes and the Justices of the Peace, the Commissioners voted to approve the new policy — passing it four to one.
A Model of Local Problem-Solving
In the end, what could have remained a bitter business rivalry became an example of community problem-solving. Within just two weeks, funeral homes that had been at odds created a plan that balances competition, fairness, and service to families — all while reducing costs to the county.
Boxwell summed it up best:
“I just think we’ve done a good job in two weeks of coming up with a plan that takes a little off the taxpayers. Certainly it’s still really important for families to feel like there’s a plan, for JPs to have people show up quick, the police department have people show up quick, and for us to feel confident that these transport services are going to be bipartisan.”
The new policy is not a permanent contract, but rather a flexible framework. As Latimer noted, if it doesn’t work as intended, the county can always change course next year.
