Council approves naming of District 6 regional park for Louis Gomez amid questions over transparency

The City Council approved, on the consent agenda, the proposed naming of the new District 6 destination park as Louis Gomez Park. The item (No. 45) remained on the consent agenda and was adopted as part of the package the council approved that day.

What happened: A stream of public commenters—residents, veterans, school and youth advocates—testified both for and against naming the park for Luis (Louie) Gomez. Supporters, including veteran and community leaders, recounted Gomez’s service in Vietnam, decades of volunteer and city employment, his involvement with Edgewood schools and youth programs, and continuing civic roles. Speakers asked council to honor a living community leader who has supported neighborhood youth and veterans.

Opposition and process concerns: Other speakers pressed the council to pause the naming, saying the formal naming committee lacked adequate representation and that open‑records communications show the process dates back to November 2023. Residents and some community leaders asked for more transparency and for a process that might consider honoring veterans collectively rather than a single living person. Melody Herrera and Michael Valdez, among others, said the park’s geographic boundaries and the committee membership did not align with published criteria.

Council response: Council Member Cabello Haverda defended the process on the dais, saying staff followed the city’s naming process and that additional community meetings were held beyond what the ordinance required. Cabello Haverda described Gomez’s background—longtime Edgewood resident, city and federal service, and leadership roles—and invited him to stand during the meeting.

Outcome: The naming item was approved with the rest of the consent agenda. The record contains public comment urging greater transparency and for the council to consider whether commemorating groups (for example, “veterans”) would better reflect community sentiment.

Quotes: In defense of the process, Council Member Cabello Haverda said, “The process for naming was followed in this instance… we went above and beyond by having more community meetings that were required because people were asking for it.” Opponents noted that open‑records requests showed early staff memos and suggested committee choices that were not ultimately appointed.

Ending: Staff said they would distribute hard copies of letters and materials provided by commenters and keep the public record open. The council’s action approved the name as part of its consent vote; no separate roll-call tally for the item was recorded in the public discussion.