← All checked meetingsRedline · April 6, 2026
Las Cruces Council Meeting - April 6, 2026
The city’s minutes for this meeting were compared, sentence by sentence, against the transcript of the recording. Of 141 statements the minutes attribute to a named person, 141 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 11 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”, “contamination”, “cancer”, “condemnation”.
What the minutes say
Nothing — this passage is absent from the minutes.
What the recording says
wide range of projects. So this highlights one of the core realities of the cap programs that a city's capital needs far exceeds the city's funding capacity to complete those projects. Another thing important to highlight on the CIP is that outside of the number of projects that we currently have, another important factor to consider is that some of the projects are funded and unfunded and some of them vary due to the nature of the project itself. So the CAP project carries programs or projects that vary in
Harris: the minutes negate a sentence the recording does not (“not”)
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 minutes contain “not” where the recording has no negation. Around: “coincidentally whether or not any of that 4.3”.
What the minutes say
Councilor Harris said coincidentally whether or not any of that $4.3 million could be directed towards the library was at the top of my list as well so I will echo that. I think there is definitely some justification there, maybe even the branch libraries, those are definitely facilities and I am sure they will be benefiting so I would like to see them benefited. The other thing is I think Fire Department, fire apparatus, 100% we need to order those. We won’t get them for a while but Hoagland, Alameda, ever since I have been driving it has been a problem. Ever since my parents have been driving it has been a problem. I think it is a good time to get that done. So, my other question is on
What the recording says
I got right now. councils. Um, thank you, mayor. And, uh, yes, coincidentally, whether any of that 4.3 million could be directed towards, uh, the library was top of my list as well. Um, so, so I'll echo that. I think that there's definitely some justification there. Maybe even the branch libraries. Um, you know, that's those are definitely facilities and, um, I'm sure they'll be benefited. So, I would like to see them benefited. Um the other thing is um on the I think fire department fire apparatus 100% we need to order those. We we won't get them for a while but um be there. Uh Hogland Alama ever since I've been driving it's been a problem. Ever since my parents have been driving it's been
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.