Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Las Cruces OKs up to $21 million bond to pay settlement in Teresa Gomez case

2081367 · January 6, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Las Cruces City Council on Jan. 6 authorized issuing up to $21 million in taxable municipal gross receipts tax revenue bonds to pay a settlement with the estate of Teresa Gomez; councilors voted to pledge a portion of local gross receipts tax revenue and set borrowing limits.

The Las Cruces City Council on Monday approved an ordinance authorizing the issuance and sale of up to $21,000,000 in taxable municipal gross receipts tax revenue bonds to pay a settlement agreement with the estate of Teresa Gomez.

The measure, council bill 25-018 (ordinance 3089), directs bond proceeds for the settlement and allows the city manager and the financial services director to finalize sale terms within set parameters: no more than $21 million in principal, an interest rate not to exceed 10 percent and a final maturity date no later than June 1, 2046. The pledged revenue for repayment is the second- and third-quarter one-quarter percent shares of the municipal gross receipts tax.

The city’s treasurer, Erica Hakkas, summarized the ordinance before the vote and said the bonds are expected to be issued through a negotiated public sale with an underwriter. "The bond proceeds will be used to pay the settlement agreement between the city of Las Cruces and the estate of Teresa Gomez," Hakkas said during the presentation.

The ordinance passed on a roll-call vote. Councilors recorded as voting yes were Councilor Cassie McClure, Councilor Matisse, Councilor Graham, Councilor Kramm and Councilor Bencomo; one councilor was absent. The mayor joined the affirmative vote.

During the public-comment period that followed the presentation, speakers tied the settlement to broader concerns about police use of force and urged greater accountability. Lucas Herndon, a District 2 resident, said the juxtaposition of asking residents to shoulder additional borrowing and taxes while also addressing a police-caused fatality drew scrutiny. Patty Hartman, a longtime resident and frequent public commenter, said she was concerned that borrowing for the settlement had proceeded without what she described as adequate accountability measures.

Other members of the public offered condolences to the family of Teresa Gomez and urged policy changes to prevent future tragedies; some speakers opposed borrowing and urged the council to pursue alternative accountability measures for law enforcement. Councilors did not link the decision to any immediate policy changes; the ordinance addressed the funding mechanism for the settlement only.

The ordinance sets procedural guardrails — caps on interest and maturity and a specified revenue pledge — but it does not set a precise issuance schedule or exact interest cost; those details will be established when the city manager and financial services director complete the negotiated sale within the council’s parameters.

Votes at a glance

- Ordinance 3089 (council bill 25-018): Authorize issuance and sale of up to $21,000,000 taxable municipal gross receipts tax revenue bonds to pay settlement with the estate of Teresa Gomez. Motion moved (mover not specified), second by Councilor Graham. Vote: Cassie McClure — yes; Councilor Matisse — yes; Councilor Graham — yes; Councilor Kramm — yes; Councilor Bencomo — yes; Councilor Flores — absent; Mayor — yes. Outcome: approved.

Context: The bond vote followed public comment in which residents tied the settlement to concerns about police violence, the cost to taxpayers and calls for greater accountability. The ordinance itself restricts the maximum principal, maximum interest rate and maturity date but leaves exact sale terms to staff within those limits.

No effective dates or repayment schedule beyond the pledge terms were specified in the ordinance text presented to the council. The council did not adopt additional police-policy measures as part of this vote; those matters remain separate and were discussed only during public comment.