← All checked meetingsRedline · August 18, 2025
Las Cruces Council Meeting - August 18th, 2025
The city’s minutes for this meeting were compared, sentence by sentence, against the transcript of the recording. Of 46 statements the minutes attribute to a named person, 46 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
3 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 9 differences
~1820 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. 2 people introduce themselves by name inside this gap. It contains: “conflict of interest”, “resign”, “lead”, “contamination”, “cancer”.
What the minutes say
Nothing — this passage is absent from the minutes.
What the recording says
Music] cancelled. You're live. You're live. Good afternoon. Welcome to city council meeting. Today is Monday, August 18th, 2025. It's approximately 100 p.m. I am Mayor Eric Enriquez. Before we start, I want to mention that we have Do we have them today? I don't see them. the uh American Sign Language. I don't see them here today. Okay, they're not here today. So, if you'll all rise and join me, we'll start with a moment of silence for the brave men and women of the United States
Jamie Michaels: a negation on the recording is missing from the minutes (“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 recording contains “not” where the minutes have nothing — which reverses its sense. Around: “is probably some reason why they are in the home with their parents”.
What the minutes say
Jamie Michaels said if they are in the care system there is probably some reason why they are in the home with their parents so we would work with CYFD and other early childhood providers in the community to provide the type of services that they need in the home or that the family needs knowing that the root cause of a lot of this is substance use for the parents.
What the recording says
program with the children. Yes, absolutely. Um obviously if they're in the care system, there um is probably some reason why they are not in the the home with their um with their parents. So, we would work with CYFD and other um early childhood providers in the community to provide the type of services that they need um in the home or that the family needs, knowing that the root cause of a lot of this is substance use for the the parents. Thank you. Anyone
Chris Faivre: a negation on the recording is missing from the minutes (“shouldn't”)
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 “shouldn't” where the minutes have nothing — which reverses its sense. Around: “longer but i will admit it probably should have taken this long”.
What the minutes say
Chris Faivre said I think there was a couple of things specific to this property that made it take a little bit longer, but I will admit it probably should have taken this long.
What the recording says
long to get to where we are given the deterioration of the property? And I say this because I can think of at least three properties in District 4 that look very similar to this one. Great question, Mayor. Mayor Prom. So, I think there was a couple things specific to this property that maybe made it take a little bit longer, but I will admit it probably shouldn't have taken this long. The first one was we were trying to identify potential owners because
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.