After public criticism, Las Cruces council removes city manager cure resolution, schedules further review

Members of the public sharply criticized the Las Cruces City Council on Monday for its handling of the city manager selection process and for what the New Mexico Attorney General’s office described as Open Meetings Act violations.

Citizens including Lynn Moore, a journalist and attorney, and Liz Rodriguez Johnson urged the council to acknowledge the Attorney General’s findings that the council engaged in an unlawful rolling quorum and to follow the AG’s prescribed remedies. Moore said the city has not adequately summarized private discussions and recommended restarting the selection process or, at minimum, fully disclosing off-meeting discussions as required by the AG.

In response, the council voted to remove resolution 25-78 — listed on the Jan. 6 agenda as an item to cure and ratify the decision on the city manager — and re-schedule consideration for Jan. 13 so staff can coordinate with the New Mexico Attorney General’s office. The motion approved the agenda as amended and moved item 7.4 to be heard first; the amended agenda passed on a roll-call vote.

The public-comment period preceding the vote included repeated requests that the council admit the AG’s finding that a rolling quorum occurred. Several speakers said the city’s proposed language did not meet the AG’s recommended options for curing the violation, noting that the AG’s letter states the council must either begin the hiring process anew or provide a detailed summary of all outside discussions and votes that led to the appointment.

Councilors recorded their votes on the agenda acceptance and amendment as follows: Councilor Cassie McClure — yes; Councilor Matisse — yes; Councilor Graham — yes; Councilor Kramm — yes; Councilor Bencomo — yes; Councilor Flores — absent; Mayor — yes.

During public comments other community members raised related concerns about transparency and trust in local government, and asked whether applicants denied interviews would seek legal recourse. Multiple speakers asked the council to be fully transparent about who was considered for the city manager job and why the internal hire was selected.

The council’s administrative staff indicated the removed item would be brought back on Jan. 13 with staff working alongside the AG’s office on the necessary corrective steps. No formal cure action was adopted on Jan. 6; the council chose to delay action to allow staff and state counsel to coordinate.