NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.

Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Relates to SB147.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC files

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

The Senate Rules Committee substitute revises SB442 residency requirements for the Seventh Judicial District Court stating that the judges in divisions 1 and 2 must reside and maintain their principal offices in Socorro county, and the district judge for division 3 must reside and maintain offices in Torrance county. By requiring one judge to reside in Torrance county, the SRCS addresses the issue of equitable geographic distribution of judges, which was the original intent of SB442.

Significant Issues

1. Travel. If there is a judge located in three out of the district's four counties as proposed by this bill, then travel time and per diem costs may be reduced. However, even if judge assignments are done on a county residency basis, all three judges will still be required to travel throughout the 7^th District on occasion. For example, a judge may recuse himself, be sick or otherwise indisposed to hear a case. Consequently, one of the other two judges must travel to hear the case-wherever it is scheduled within the district.

2. Distribution of Judgeships. The Seventh Judicial District is the largest geographic judicial district in New Mexico (see attached map). By having residency requirements -- two judgeships in Socorro and one in Torrance counties -- would ensure that the judges in this district are more geographically distributed among the population centers on some equitable basis. Historically, they have been concentrated in a single area (Socorro county). However, it is unclear whether caseload would be equitably distributed under these requirements.

2. Elections. If judges continue to be appointed and elected district-wide, there will be a larger number of attorneys to vote and choose from compared to the selection of attorneys if the requirements are limited to one county.

.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

A decrease in overnight travel expenses may occur, along with per diem and mileage, if judgeships are distributed geographically throughout the district. No dollar decrease is being indicated in the table however, since the amount of saving may be less than one thousand dollars.

In changing residency requirements for judges in the Seventh Judicial District, the question arises whether the resources needed for a judge in Torrance county is available: accessible courthouse, office space, law books, staff, equipment, etc. (These resources are already available in Socorro.) If new resources are needed for Torrance county, then there will be a significant impact to the general fund. Additional information is needed on this issue before a further assessment can be made.

RELATIONSHIP

SB442 relates to SB147 regarding residency requirements for the 7^th Judicial District.

QUESTIONS

1. By redistributing the judgeships of the Seventh Judicial District, how will it affect court operations? Will it affect court efficiency and scheduling? Caseload management? Expediency of hearings?

CMH/prr