Ruidoso Downs council debates mayor raise, approves new council pay structure

The Ruidoso Downs City Council spent a large portion of its meeting debating proposed raises for the mayor and councilors and, after public comment and council amendments, approved changing council pay to $250 per meeting.

The council opened a public hearing on Ordinance 2025-09, which would amend Title 3 of the city code to increase mayoral compensation to $1,800 per month effective with the term beginning January 2026. Multiple members of the public told the council the increase was too large and urged caution. “This is not a job. This is public service,” one commenter said, arguing that a large stipend corrodes the principle of volunteer civic service.

City staff read the ordinance draft and explained the process: the notice of intent to adopt was published Dec. 8, and if the council adopts an ordinance tonight it would be published again and would take effect after the required post-adoption publication period. During council deliberations a member moved to amend the mayoral pay proposal to $1,250 per month; that amendment was seconded and a roll call recorded Counselor Laszlo, Counselor David and Counselor Miller in favor and Counselor Proctor opposed.

The council then turned to Ordinance 2025-10, which would change council compensation. The draft as read proposed $900 per month with deductions for missed meetings; councilors debated several alternatives, including a $600 monthly stipend, retaining meeting-based pay at higher per-meeting amounts, or modest per-meeting increases. Supporters of a monthly stipend said the change could help recruit younger members who must miss work to attend meetings; opponents said per-meeting pay keeps incentives aligned with attendance and is less costly in months with few meetings.

After extended discussion the council amended the council-compensation proposal to set pay at $250 per meeting (an increase of $50 from the prior $200 rate) while keeping existing language about which meetings qualify and attendance/deduction rules. The clerk recorded a roll-call showing Counselor Miller — Aye; Counselor Lacewell — Aye; Counselor Baber — Yes; and Counselor Proctor — Yes; the motion carried as read in the meeting.

Speakers repeatedly pressed the council about notice and transparency: several commenters and former elected officials said ordinance items that may be adopted the same night should appear on the agenda as an “intent to adopt” so citizens have an opportunity to attend and respond before a vote.

What happens next: the ordinances discussed will require the post-adoption publication steps described by counsel and the clerk before any change takes legal effect. The council closed the public hearing and moved on to other business before adjourning.

(Reporting notes: quotes and vote tallies are taken from council roll-call and public comments reported in the meeting transcript.)