Las Cruces cures transparency violation, but not unanimously

Justin Garcia, Las Cruces Bulletin

This article was originally published by the Las Cruces Bulletin.

LAS CRUCES - The Las Cruces City Council passed four resolutions on Jan. 13 to remedy a violation of a state transparency law.

The actions cure the violation after the New Mexico Department of Justice declared in December that the council had broken the state’s Open Meetings Act at multiple points during the selection of a new city manager in 2024. (On April 1, Ikani Taumoepeau, then an assistant city manager, assumed the role.)

However, despite the passage, some councilors questioned the process and necessity of remedy while apologizing for the error.

"I feel this whole thing is taking responsibility for our mistakes,” Councilor Johana Bencomo said.

Two councilors, Cassie McClure and Bill Mattiace, voted against some of the remedy resolutions, citing concerns about transparency. Still, all the councilors made it a point to express their continuing support for Taumoepeau, who was not present at the meeting.

"Can we learn from this? Absolutely,” Mayor Eric Enriquez said before passing the final of four resolutions that cured the error.

Nine months after the Las Cruces Bulletin filed a complaint last March, the New Mexico Department of Justice found the city “engaged in closed deliberations and invalid (final) actions prior to the single, open public meeting held to discuss the hiring of a new city manager on Apr. 1, 2024,” a letter announcing the finding said.

In the same findings, the NMDOJ told the city of Las Cruces it could restart the search or pass resolutions declaring what was discussed in closed meetings. The city chose the latter, although several public commenters at the Jan. 13 meeting called on the council to restart the search.

Although public comment was not required, the agenda provided spectators the opportunity to speak about each resolution.

Some of the commenters also expressed dissatisfaction about the city manager’s salary, advocated for public meetings with finalists and presented a mix of complaints about city administration dating back to the service of the previous city manager, Ifo Pili. The council made clear repeatedly that Taumoepeau’s job performance was not on the agenda.

OMA sets parameters about what and how public bodies like city councils can discuss outside of open session, such as opinions related to personnel matters concerning individual employees. The law’s purpose is to ensure that decisions are made in public and that the public has access to the process.

“All states have such laws, which are essentially motivated by the belief that the democratic ideal is best served by a well-informed public,” an NMDOJ guide on the OMA states. “Sunshine laws generally require that public business be conducted in full public view, that the actions of public bodies be taken openly, and that the deliberations of public bodies be open to the public.”

Bencomo said the nine months it took for the Attorney General’s office to determine a violation had occurred had led to a de facto referendum on the current city manager, which she said was unfair.

“I have some pretty serious issues with that,” Bencomo said, pointing out that a similar OMA violation in Bernalillo County was handled faster.

Bencomo also said the AG’s investigation lacked a legal discernment between malicious intent and a failure of internal checks and balances. This followed public comments which, at times, accused the council of deceptive intent, which council members repeatedly denied.

Councilor Becky Corran, who also raised questions about the AGs process, said that the city has learned from this process. She said improved transparency would be visible in an upcoming search to replace the executive director of the Animal Services Center of Mesilla Valley.

Justin Garcia is a reporter for the Las Cruces Bulletin. This article was provided through the AP Storyshare program.