The City of T or C stayed within budget, showing no wild or emergency spending, which was not the case in prior years under other city managers.
The fiscal year ran from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026.
As part of passing the final budget for the upcoming fiscal year, (which the city commission did in a special meeting July 29), they first had to approve the ending fund balances and fourth quarter report for FY2026, which ensures the books don’t hide revenue and expenses from the prior year and that they are transparently carried forward.
Only Mayor Rolf Hechler asked a question about the FY2026 close out; “Was there anything that was unexpected?” A vague, but pertinent question that could have been framed: ‘How well did we plan and estimate?’
Finance Director Jocelyn Holguin was succinct; “No,” there were no surprises, which is quite impressive given the fact that both City Manager Gary Whitehead and CFO Holguin were new at their jobs a year ago.
The FY2026 documents can be found in the July 29 city packet from page 15 through 74: https://cms5.revize.com/revize/truthconsequencesnew/7-29-26%20%20Special%20CC%20Agenda%20Packet.pdf?t=202607281546070
I looked at nearly 30 funds that have to do with government functions and services. I ignored the capital projects funds, which estimated revenue and expense budgets hit or don’t hit their marks dependent on receiving grants and engineering approvals from state agencies on their time lines.
There is a lot of slip between the cup and the lip when it comes to capital projects, some of which have been on the city’s books for six years or longer, such as the Foch Street project and the sewer vacuum system project.
I wanted to know how well city staff did in estimating costs, needs and spending, so I looked at the 30 funds they have more control over.
Here were a few things that stuck out:
The police department estimated it would spend $80,000 on fuel, but ended up spending $93,000. This could be more Trump’s fault–the Strait of Hormuz shutdown–or the city has hired more officers from out of town. Using your vehicle 24-7 for work and commuting, along with fuel costs, has been a police department recruiting policy for the last three or four years.
The police department estimated it would spend $70,000 on overtime, but ended up spending $131,000. This could be the city commission’s fault, which insists on using city staff time to put on Fiesta, which activities are being extended, with no firm bookkeeping to isolate what it really costs the citizens to put on Fiesta. Proper bookkeeping would make this use of city staff a probable anti-donation-clause violation.
The parks department estimated it would spend $3,000 on overtime, but ended up spending $9,000, which also is likely more use of staff time for Fiesta.
Parks estimated it would spend $30,000 on maintenance and repairs, but ended up spending $40,000; estimated it would spend $2,500 on contract services but ended up spending $5,000.
The Utilities and Insurance Fund (vehicle, workman’s comp, general liability and property insurance; unemployment, software, debt payments intercepted from city gross receipts taxes, audit contract, professional services, etc.) was estimated at $1.46 million but was nearly $200,000 more. Insurance went up about 20 percent, Whitehead said in a prior meeting.
Lodgers’ Tax Revenue was estimated at a little over $591,000, but only a little over $486,000 came in, a $105,000 difference.
General Fund Revenues were estimated at $7.38 million, but $7.8 million came in, a nearly $420,000 boon due primarily to gross receipts revenue being higher than expected. The general fund, as usual, budgeted to go into deficit spending, so the $420,000 went to cover that hole.
The municipal pool, always a drag on the general fund, usually costing the people $250,000 and even $300,000, has significantly reduced that drag. Revenues were estimated at $9,400 but were a little over $14,000. Expenses were estimated at nearly $189,000, but only a little over $124,000 was expended.
Revenue from recycling within the solid waste department’s budget was estimated at $30,000 but brought in $25,000. The rate study done nearly two years ago showed that recycling costs the people about $250,000 a year.
Revenue from the transfer station, that is people bringing in trash to be weighed and then put on trucks that go to the South Central Solid Waste Authority landfill about 75 miles away, was estimated at $600,000 but brought in $1,030,700. This is due to the City of Elephant Butte’s private contractor bringing some of its trucks to the city’s transfer station. The private contractor provides a polycart pickup service to Elephant Butte residents and businesses and charges the same $36 per 95-gallon cart that T or C residents are charged, proving that the T or C weigh station’s tonnage fees are too low, since the private contractor makes a profit at the T or C rate. It also bears out what the T or C solid waste study showed–T or C polycart customers are overpaying for their service, which is the only source of profit or revenue in the T or C solid waste department’s services.
The city airport only brought in $90,000 in revenue, about $130,000 less than estimated. Worse, expenses were estimated at $473,000, but were over $486,000, going $13,000 over budget.
However, when I added up what the city departments were budgeted to spend and what they actually spent, there was $3.66 million NOT spent.
The city has many more frugally-minded staff than spendthrifts and the budgeting was better targeted than in prior years.