Los Alamos County reviews budget challenges amid declining revenue projections
Also discussed: How to support small businesses, and gauging support for 2025 ordinances
by Stephanie Nakhleh
The Los Alamos County Council met Tuesday evening (Jan. 14) for a wide-ranging work session that painted a challenging financial picture for the years ahead while wrestling with questions of business support and new ordinances. All seven councilors gathered at Fire Station No. 3 in White Rock.
Budget outlook and GRT concerns
County finance officials Helen Perraglio and Erika Thomas presented a 10-year financial projection that forecasts declining future gross receipts tax (GRT) revenue. While FY2024 saw higher-than-projected GRT income, Perraglio said this increase was primarily due to temporary DOE-related capital spending and shouldn't be considered the new baseline.
“If we end up with a larger influx of capital-related spending that turns into gross receipts for us, it may delay the time, it may kick the can down the road,” Perraglio said. “But we do know that once [the DOE-driven] capital is done, we do have a new baseline.”
Council approved FY2026 budget guidance in a 6-1 vote, with Councilor David Reagor opposed. “It's not how I think we should be doing [things],” he said, explaining his opposition. “I think we should be looking at this as a windfall era, and using that for our capital improvements instead of FTE accruals, which is what we've been doing the last two years.”
The guidance includes a 6% salary increase for non-union employees and anticipates the need for at least a quarter-cent GRT increase by July 2026.
County Manager Anne Laurent acknowledged the County is sitting on a comfortable piggy bank of money at the moment, but she leaned on the importance of maintaining healthy reserves: “Having a GRT increment that goes up and down by 20%, 30% at any given year is why we have our reserves the way we do. So we can weather those storms and adjust accordingly.”
Councilor Randall Ryti said he is still, as he has been for his many years on Council, concerned about what’s being done to support affordable housing for County employees: “People should have the option if they want to live in the county... it makes sense that people would be getting a living wage from the County.”
Are small businesses getting the help they need?
Much of the meeting focused on improving Council engagement with the local business community, leading to a spirited discussion about the best path forward.
Councilor Suzie Havemann didn’t like the sound of forming a new working group to engage with local businesses, a proposal she sees as laying on new bureaucratic structures: “From the minute I campaigned to run on County Council, I had the desired outcome to make this a less demanding position,” she said. “It's already massively time-consuming, and we're never, ever going to be able to recruit young parents who want to be on Council if there's just so much that we all have to do beyond these Tuesday night meetings.”
Several business owners spoke during public comment, including J&L Self Storage owner John Courtwright and SALA owner Allan Saenz. Saenz expressed appreciation for the discussion, but wants to see concrete action: “Now that we're thinking about budget, consider how much that department is investing in the community for our long-term return of investment, and also for quality of life of residents.”
Ultimately, Chair Theresa Cull announced she would appoint a working group including Councilors Melanee Hand, Randy Ryti, and David Reagor to review existing business support initiatives and recent survey results.

Future ordinances generate mixed response
Council debated several potential ordinances for 2025:
Single-use plastics: In a 6-1 vote, Council directed the Environmental Sustainability Board to evaluate single-use plastic bags. Councilor Havemann, responding to a comment from Councilor Reagor objecting to what he sees as government overreach, cited the environmental impact of laissez-faire policies: “When people choose … to consume plastic bags that go out in our environment, that infringes on my rights to have clean surroundings and clean water systems, and infringes on my enjoyment of the environment and wildlife,” she said.
Wildlife feeding: Council unanimously approved gathering additional data before proceeding with a revised ordinance. Public commenter Garth Reader supported the measure: “Wild animals are not personal pets and do not need our support. Feeding wildlife is bad for their health and can be dangerous for people in a variety of ways.”
Vacant properties: Discussion of a potential registry ordinance revealed limited enthusiasm. “It's really penalizing businesses or property owners that are already in a situation where they have a vacant property,” said Councilor Hand. “I'm not sure that this is going to be anything that by putting another fee is really going to solve the problem.”
Minimum wage: Council opted not to pursue a local minimum-wage ordinance after a brief discussion. Councilor Ryn Herrmann noted that while most businesses already pay above minimum wage, “there are one or two businesses that would not be able to do this and would probably be forced to shutter.”

Council also briefly discussed future traffic safety measures, including ordinances for traffic cameras and hands-free cellphone use while driving. These items will return for public discussion before formal introduction.
County Manager Laurent reminded Council that while there are many desired initiatives to support local businesses and community development, the County faces legal constraints on how it can use public funds. “I appreciate staff's contribution,” she said, “but I also don't think operationally the County is going to solve all these topics. I think they're bigger than just the County.”