Perfect World
Las Cruces
Town SquareParks & Rec WatchChecking the record
Parks & Rec Watch · Checking the record

Where the record disagrees with itself.

These meetings are not broadcast — apart from a few months in 2020, when the pandemic put the board on Zoom and the public could watch. There is no recording to check the minutes against, so the usual kind of fact check — what was said against what was written down — is not available to anyone, including us. What is available is the corpus itself: six years of one board’s documents, which is long enough that they begin contradicting each other, and sometimes themselves.

Every finding below has been checked by reading both sides. A script proposes candidates; a person confirms them; only the confirmed ones appear here. Each one quotes both sides and names the page, so you can check it rather than take our word. None of these are our errors — they are defects in the city’s own record.

A record that is not where it should be

The August 21, 2025 meeting has no record of its own

There is no Laserfiche document for the August 21, 2025 meeting. Its full record — roll call, public comment, the PIF study, the playground replacement program, the $192 million GRT bond work session — is filed inside the April 17, 2025 document, beginning on page 8. Anyone browsing the board's folder by date sees a gap between July and October and would reasonably conclude the meeting never happened. Every one of the 56 documents from 2020 forward was scanned for a second meeting header; this is the only one.

The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board held a meeting on April 17, 2025

2025-04-17 · page 1

The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board held a meeting on August 21, 2025

2025-04-17 · page 8
A date that disagrees

A meeting filed under the wrong date

The document is filed in Laserfiche as "Parks & Rec 07-25-2021", but it says July 15 three times: in its own title block, in its opening sentence, and again in the closing paragraph. Nothing in the document says July 25. The filename is the outlier, so this meeting is dated July 15, 2021 here and the archive slug is left alone — it is how the city files it, and changing it would break the link back to the source.

The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board held a meeting on July 15, 2021, at 6:05 p.m. via zoom webinar.

2021-07-25 · page 1

Laserfiche document name: "Parks & Rec 07-25-2021"

2021-07-25 · page 1
A date that disagrees

April's minutes open by saying they are January's

The title block, the agenda-approval motion and the closing all say April 21, 2022. The opening sentence says the board met on January 20, 2022 — the date of the previous meeting whose minutes this document was evidently copied from. The meeting is April 21; the opening sentence is the error. It is a small thing that makes the first line of an official record wrong.

The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board held a meeting on January 20, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall

2022-04-21 · page 1

Title block: "April 21, 2022"

2022-04-21 · page 1
A date that disagrees

July's minutes open by saying they are July 12th's

The same defect as April's, and in the same year. Title block, closing paragraph and agenda motion all say July 21, 2022; the opening sentence says July 12. There was no July 12 meeting in the archive. Two transposed digits, in the sentence that establishes what the document is.

The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board held a meeting on July 12, 2022, at 6:00 p.m.

2022-07-21 · page 1

The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Meeting of July 21, 2022, at City Hall Council

2022-07-21 · page 1
A gap in the record

Thirty of the last eighty months have no meeting document

The board's own stated schedule is the third Thursday of every month. Between January 2020 and August 2026 there are 80 months and 56 documents, and 30 of those months have no document at all: March, April, May, September and December 2020; August through December 2021; February, March, October and December 2022; May and December 2023; January, March, June and October 2024; February and May through September and November 2025; and March, June and August 2026. 2025 is the thinnest year in the record, missing seven months.

A missing document is not proof of a missing meeting, and that is the point. Some of these months the board did not meet — it lost November 2024 to a lack of quorum, and the early 2020 gap covers the start of the pandemic. For others the meeting may have happened and the minutes never been filed. From outside the city there is no way to tell which, because the only public evidence that a meeting occurred is the document that is not there. August 2025 is the proven case: that meeting did happen, and it appears here as a gap only because its record was filed inside another meeting's document.

Stated schedule: third Thursday of the month, 6:00 p.m., 1501 E. Hadley Ave

2026-05-21 · page 1

The August 21, 2025 meeting, filed inside the April 17 document — a month that reads as a gap but was not one

2025-04-17 · page 8
A gap in the record

One meeting's minutes were written from memory

The February 16, 2023 minutes open with a parenthetical note, before the roll: the transcriptionist's file of the meeting did not process, so the minutes would be summarized from memory. There is no recording of these meetings for the public, so that document is the only account of what happened that night, and it is an unaided recollection. It is also the shortest substantive document in the corpus at three pages, and both Staff Comments and Board Member Comments read "No Record."

In the same meeting, a member of the public recommended that the minutes be verbatim. The record shows no response to him. Three years later the same commenter told the board that its minutes are stripped of exactly what he stated, and a board member proposed letting him submit a written statement to be entered as written. That proposal was never taken up again either.

Note: Transcriptionist file of meeting did not process, so minutes will be summarized from memory

2023-02-16 · page 1

Mr. Gregory Shervanick, member of the public, recommended meeting minutes be verbatim.

2023-02-16 · page 2
A gap in the record

For a few months in 2020, the public could watch. Then that stopped.

These meetings are not broadcast and never have been, with one exception: when the pandemic pushed the board onto Zoom in 2020, the meetings became watchable in real time. The June 18, 2020 minutes record the chair relaying a question from a member of the public "who is viewing the meeting" — someone following along live, from home, and able to put a question about water use to staff while the item was still open. Comment at those meetings was solicited by email in advance, and three emailed comments were read into the record in full.

The board went back to a room. Today the only public record of a meeting is the document a transcriptionist produces afterward, and in February 2023 even that failed. Nothing in the record says the change was decided or discussed; the remote meetings simply stop.

Ms. McClure said she received a question from Mr. Gregory Shervanick who is viewing the meeting, on how much water use will occur.

2020-06-18 · page 5

Public Participation: None. — the current record, with no way for anyone not in the room to have been there

2026-07-16 · page 1
A date that disagrees

Three months running, the minutes were approved under the wrong heading

Item 4 of a Parks & Rec agenda is Approval of the Minutes, and it names the meeting whose minutes are up. In August, September and October 2023 that heading reads July 20, 2023 every time — the same stale line carried forward three months running.

The motions underneath do not match it, and do not agree with each other either. August approved the June 15 minutes. September approved August 17. October approved September 21. So across three meetings the July 20 minutes are named in every heading and approved in none of them, and June's are approved in August after having been approved already in July.

Whether the July 2023 minutes were ever adopted cannot be settled from the record. That matters more than a typo: adopted minutes are the city's official account of a meeting, and an account nobody can show was adopted is difficult to rely on.

4. Approval of the Minutes July 20, 2023: … Meeting Minutes June 15, 2023, seconded by Raish. Motion passed.

2023-08-17 · page 1

4. Approval of the Minutes July 20, 2023: … Meeting Minutes September 21, 2023

2023-10-19 · page 1

A finding is only listed once both sides have been read in full. Candidates the script raises that turn out to be explainable — a project cost that genuinely rose, two figures that are measuring different things — are dismissed rather than published. Publishing an unchecked contradiction would be exactly the kind of original claim-making this section does not do.