← All checked meetingsRedline · March 4, 2024
Las Cruces Council Meeting - March 4, 2024
The city’s minutes for this meeting were compared, sentence by sentence, against the transcript of the recording. Of 82 statements the minutes attribute to a named person, 81 were found in the recording.
Tracks the recording closely. The comparison is mechanical and has no opinion about why two documents differ. A gap can be honest summarising; a mismatch can be the caption software mishearing. Both texts are shown so you can decide, and the correction form at the bottom is there for when the machine is wrong.
Watch the recording · Read the minutes as text · The city’s original PDF · checked 8/14/2026
2 differences
Differences that ordinary summarising does not explain — words nobody said, figures and negations that disagree, vote rolls that don’t add up, and stretches where somebody spoke and went unrecorded. Show all 12 differences
~1170 words of the recording have no counterpart in the minutes
Missing from the minutesThis part of the meeting left no trace in the written record. This stretch of the meeting is not reflected anywhere in the written record. Some gaps are legitimate — recesses, or a presentation summarised in one line. Others are discussion that simply did not make it in. 1 person introduce themselves by name inside this gap. It contains: “conflict of interest”, “investigation”, “resign”, “lead”, “contamination”.
What the minutes say
Nothing — this passage is absent from the minutes.
What the recording says
Department as they keep our city safe 365 so everyone please rise for a moment of silence councelor corin will you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance please States the stand thank you we will start with presentation of certificates proclamations councelor Corin is going to help us do that today for the nitorum Award presented to Public Works and parks and wreck by councilor [Music] Corin okay if Public Public Works parks and wreck folks all want to come up and and and join me sort of line
Erik Harrigan: a negation on the recording is missing from the minutes (“no”)
Says something differentBoth records carry the same sentence, but they disagree on a number or on whether it was negative. The same sentence appears in both records, but the recording contains “no” where the minutes have nothing — which reverses its sense. Around: “rates really hit a high in the november time frame”.
What the minutes say
Erik Harrigan, RBC Capital Markets said we are the City’s Municipal Advisor. So, we looked at selling the bonds in and around this time. Interest rates really hit a high in the November time frame. Rates have since come down to that point with the idea that the Federal Reserve was going to start pivoting from raising interest rates to actually cutting interest rates. Based upon the economic data that we have received again the year, labor market is still incredibly strong. The feds sort of key inflationary factors are kind of staying where they are at and so instead of the federal reserve anticipating this is all anticipated that they might lower the rate two or four times this year based upon how strong the economy is they may not even lower the interest rate. Where the rates are they have come off their highs we recommended a spring sale and the sale does coincide with obviously the approval of the city council. The interest rate as Ms. Jaquez is talking about is set around bids that we received on a week from this Thursday, so we are going to post the preliminary offering document this Thursday, then notice gets sent out to investment banks all across the country inviting them t
What the recording says
um yeah I think it's afternoon uh Eric herrian with RBC Capital markets we are the city's Municipal adviser um so we looked at uh at you know selling the bonds in and around this time interest rates really hit a high in the no November time frame um rates have since come down from that point with the idea that the Federal Reserve was going to start pivoting from Raising interest rates to actually cutting interest rates rades um based upon the you know economic data that we've received the beginning of the year labor market is still incredibly strong um the you know the fed's sort of key um inflationary factors are kind of staying where they're at and so instead of the Federal Reserve anticip
Were you there?
If the machine got something wrong, or if you can say what was actually said, put it on the record. Submissions are reviewed before they appear.