The pandemic shutdowns, necessary for health and safety, caused the economy to grind to a halt.

It’s the amount that is shocking.

Starting July 1, the city faces a $100 million budget deficit.

Already, the city had forecast a $46 million budget gap across all of its funds for the current fiscal year that ends June 30. Next up, though, is dealing with the projected $100 million deficit — which could be as high as $150 million if a second wave of the novel coronavirus hits. The shortfall is not just in the general fund budget but in all the many ways the city spends money, projected around $370 million this fiscal year before the pandemic.

While shocking, the math remains pretty simple.

Recurring expenses are higher than recurring revenues.

Cities, like state governments, cannot spend more than they take in.

The federal government can spend at a deficit. Santa Fe, nor any other city, cannot. That’s why the construction of a proposed budget — with just a few weeks to do it and a lack of hard numbers — is going to be difficult.

Already city workers are dealing with reduced working hours and the city has frozen its spending, although that still hasn’t made up all of the $46 million gap. More cuts now and in the future will be needed.

Mayor Alan Webber, in discussing the budget crisis with reporters Monday, would not predict what services might be impacted — and that’s wise. First, the city doesn’t know just how bleak its revenue picture is. What’s more, City Council members have to be brought into the budget discussions early.

Here’s why the revenue picture is cloudy. Gross receipts taxes are collected at point of sale. Then, the state disburses them to cities, counties and other entities, with a lag between collection and disbursement of about two months. Santa Fe just received its GRT payment for March, which had declined only about 5 percent.

That’s the month that Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham issued her public health order shutting down much of the state because of COVID-19 — city officials expect April’s GRTs to bottom out.

Adding to the pain is the cancellation of Santa Fe’s summer events, the economic engines for a town dependent on visitor spending. No markets, no opera, no music festivals, no downtown bandstand concerts. The situation is unprecedented, with hope remaining that federal and state dollars will help shore up the budget somewhat. Although such aid is being held up by absurd Washington politics.

A changed budget process will allow greater scrutiny earlier, so that difficult choices don’t come as a surprise. Instead of a Finance Committee presentation and budget hearings, the budget proposal will go before all three major city committees — Finance, Public Works and Utilities and Quality Life. This should translate into greater input from City Council members as the budget is being built.

Those aren’t the only people who need to weigh in. On Monday, the city put a survey for citizens online about what services matter most to them. (Here’s a link: or visit the city’s Facebook page; it’s there, too.)

On it, you’ll see questions about the bus system, the downtown shuttle service, youth programs and all the other bits and pieces that make up the work of city government. Other queries cover trash pickup, recycling, fixing streets, maintaining parks and the basic blocks of services. The city is trying to find out what matters most to residents.

One section of the survey demonstrated how serious the budget gap is, with respondents asked to weigh the importance of recreational centers versus libraries.

Keep all the rec centers but no libraries? Keep all the libraries but no rec centers? Cut from both? Such could be the choices, perhaps the only choice.

We’ve said repeatedly during past budget crises that governments must ensure public safety, pick up the trash, maintain roads and keep the water flowing — the basics, which include libraries. Considering the nature of the pandemic, with a virus that targets people with conditions such as diabetes and heart trouble, we would add parks and recreational activities to the list of essentials. Job losses could mean the city needs to help feed people.

What happens next is up to us — at least, that’s what Webber or any politician would have us believe. But if all these surveys said let’s eliminate cops, do you think the city would jettison its police department?

What happens next is a direct result of who we voted for, which is why these discussions should be watched by everyone who pays taxes. This is not about surveys. This is about decisions made by people who ran for office, and not just the mayor, every city councilor, too. This is where they earn — or lose — our votes.

Show what you're thinking about this story

You must be logged in to react.
Click any reaction to login.

Recommended for you

(3) comments

simon brackley

Reduce the Cadillac health plan. Consider property tax increase. Sell some city land and other assets. Reduce park and road maintenance. Reduce city payroll. Merge some city and county functions. Increase business license fees. Increase fees for park uses. Switch to online functions wherever possible..... just a few thoughts.

Patricio R. Downs

I've been saying for years that Santa Fe has been far too dependent on tourism to provide the workforce with primarily service jobs. (Government is a big employer, too, what with being the state capital and county seat, but that's a topic for another day.) Once we get back to some semblance of "normal", what would be the harm in looking at how to diversify the job market? Bring something in that would have good jobs and increase the tax base? I realize this is an article about how COVID-19 has decimated the city and its ability to pay the bills, but as the article notes, the city is spending more than it's bringing in. (Or as a famous athlete once said, "When your outgo exceeds your income, your upkeep becomes your downfall.")



Having said that, some might get the idea that "trimming the fat" is the answer to the city's financial problems. Ask people in the Eurozone how well austerity worked for them. Yes, many services currently offered need to be re-examined as to necessity and effectiveness; however, you can't cut your way to prosperity. Now is the time to make some hard decisions; however, think with the long-term view as to where you'd like to see things be in 5 years rather than "let's get out of this crisis and kick the can down the road."

George Welland

No easy decisions in tough budget times...? _________________________________________

WHAT OF NO-BRAINER DECISIONS Vs. DUMB INACTION __________________________________________

Let's be painfully honest, neither Santa Fe's elected officials or their unionized work force seem very bright. Because every week that passes without mass lay-offs (especially of those earning less than $25.00 per hour) deprives the worker and the local economy of $600.00 per worker at the federal government's expense. For those who are unaware of how unemployment insurance (UI) works, the employer pays a nominal amount in payroll taxes that builds up in a trust fund for economic emergencies (like the one we're in, and to which the federal government kicks in additional funds). So far the governor, her labor secretary, and the legislature have hampered efforts to stop COVID-19, by holding up UI payments for regular state UI (wage slaves) by not liberalizing the state UI laws (which is permitted by a simple pen stroke from the state labor secretary and encouraged by the feds). In the city's defense, ORDINARILY most governments are self insured and have to pay for their employees jobless benefits at 100% so the city pays the workers who are furloughed whether they work or not, BUT under the CARES Act the feds will reimburse governmental entities for these UI costs and then will pay an additional $600.00 per week on top of that! It doesn't take much to figure out that an employee eligible for the average UI weekly benefit amount (WBA) of $300.00 a week plus the federal increase will get paid $ 900.00 a week. Workers are required to be able to return to work at the employer's convenience to remain eligible, but those workers will also be allowed to work and earn up to 1/5 of their pre-$600 increased WBA with no reduction in benefits until they earn more than their WBA, or in other words they can easily gross a over $1,000 per week and the city can make the employees work at least one day a week to keep the structure of government and a minimal level of service in place (remember the workers have to stay around and thus spend their money in the local economy)! Why the union is too rigid and unimaginative to figure this out (or why management is too dumb) is beyond me... unless the lack of government services wouldn't be noticed and expose the city's management for the farce that it may be? And as far as those higher paid city workers are concerned... well it's pretty hard to worry about them when the city is incapable of taking care of its lower paid workers when it costs nothing to do so (and would have the benefit of keeping people at home).

Welcome to the discussion.

Thank you for joining the conversation on Please familiarize yourself with the community guidelines. Avoid personal attacks: Lively, vigorous conversation is welcomed and encouraged, insults, name-calling and other personal attacks are not. No commercial peddling: Promotions of commercial goods and services are inappropriate to the purposes of this forum and can be removed. Respect copyrights: Post citations to sources appropriate to support your arguments, but refrain from posting entire copyrighted pieces. Be yourself: Accounts suspected of using fake identities can be removed from the forum.