Las Cruces votes on BRT increase, but where will the money go?

Justin Garcia Las Cruces Bulletin

To tax or not to tax?

That’s the question Las Cruces residents will have to grapple with on a ballot measure to increase the gross income tax rate.

Proponents of the measure say the increase will provide much-needed revenue for Las Cruces. City officials said the money would be limited to investments in public safety and infrastructure.

But opponents say Las Cruces officials should put their money to better use before resorting to higher taxes.

The proposal, which the Las Cruces City Council approved and sent to voters over the summer, would increase the GRT rate by 0.032 percent. That equates to about 32 cents for every $100 spent on goods and services in Las Cruces. Residents pay about 8 cents on the dollar (80 cents per $100) when city, county and state tax rates are taken into account.

If approved by voters, the tax increase would generate an estimated $11 million in recurring revenue.

The measure on the ballot reads: “Shall the City of Las Cruces impose a municipal gross receipts tax in the amount of three hundred twenty thousand percent (0.3250%), the proceeds of which shall be used to finance capital improvements and maintenance” for public safety, streets, parks and other public facilities and critical infrastructure?”

A summer poll of Las Cruces voters found that about 63 percent supported the measure as long as the money was used for investments in public safety, street and traffic calming, parking improvements and quality of life improvements.

But these are vague categories, and interviews conducted by the Las Cruces Bulletin show the council isn’t entirely on board with how the money should be spent.

“We are not talking about increasing BRT to increase salaries,” Councilwoman Johana Bencomo told the Bulletin. “That’s not it. The BRT increase would go directly to capital improvements, meaning our roads, infrastructure, meaning our parking infrastructure, meaning especially police and fire infrastructure.”

Councilman Bill Mattiace saw things differently and suggested using the money for increased police salaries or expanded services like Project LIGHT. Mattiace, a former city councilman and mayor who returned to the city council in 2024, said spending money on anything that doesn’t address crime is problematic.

“The reality is we’ve had some problems and Chief (Jeremy) Story, (fire chief) Jason Smith and the city manager are making it a priority and I believe this referendum, if passed, will make it even bigger “Priority,” Mattiace said, referring to crime.

Still, Mattiace said he supports sending the measure to voters.

Mayor Eric Enriquez said he would like to limit how the money is used but ensure the money is available for a variety of projects.

“The limited fund would be dedicated to public safety and critical infrastructure. Again, public safety includes roads, streets, lighting, police and fire departments. We always believe that public safety is about responding, but we strive for the utmost safety of the community and then the critical infrastructure,” Enriquez said. “This could also be an emergency sewer line. A number of things could come up.”

The city declined the Bulletin’s request to interview City Manager Ikani Taumoepeau about the proposal.

“As employees, we cannot take a position on a ballot measure, we can only provide information about the process. Ikani said he would be more comfortable allowing elected officials to discuss the BRT increase,” Mandy Guss, a city spokeswoman, said in an email to the Bulletin. “If you have any questions about the process or need any data/details, let me know and we will be happy to provide them.”

“This is a really bad time to raise taxes,” conservative activist Sarah Smith wrote in an opinion column published in the Bulletin. “Many families are struggling to make ends meet as the cost of living has increased in recent years, including higher prices for gasoline, housing, food and clothing. “The city’s budget has increased by over 40 percent since 2019, yet they are still demanding more money from us?”

Bulletin columnist Walt Rubel joined Smith in questioning the proposal.

“Let’s start with this: the city’s budget will never be large enough to meet all its needs. And so it is not surprising that public support for a proposed gross receipts tax increase increases as people learn how the money might be used,” Rubel said in a June column.

While it’s unclear what voters will do, the public’s overwhelming support for general obligation bonds is an indicator that the measure could pass.

In 2018 and again in 2022, Las Cruces voters approved bonds for public investments in new fire stations, affordable housing and a sports and recreation complex on the city’s east mesa. These measures often passed with more than 60 percent of the vote.