A[1] NOTE:  As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only 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 (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative Website.  The Adobe PDF version includes all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not.  Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC’s office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

 

 

F I S C A L   I M P A C T   R E P O R T

 

 

 

SPONSOR:

Aragon

 

DATE TYPED:

01/30/02

 

HB

 

 

SHORT TITLE:

Magistrate Court Judgeship Changes

 

SB

4

 

 

ANALYST:

Hayes

 

 

APPROPRIATION

 

 

Appropriation Contained

Estimated Additional Impact

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY02

FY03

FY02

FY03

 

 

 

$278.0

 

 

Recurring**

General Fund

 

 

 

($900.9)

Recurring

General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

 

Relates to Appropriation in The General Appropriation Act  Section 4, Magistrate Court Program

 

Duplicates SB55

 

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

 

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

Public Defender Department (PDD)

Judiciary Unified Budget

LFC files

 

SUMMARY

 

     Synopsis of Bill

 

I. A. Senate Bill 4 amends various subsections of Section 35 NMSA 1978 to eliminate a magistrate judgeship each from Colfax, Eddy, Grant, Lincoln, and Taos counties as well as two (2) magistrate judgeships from Lea county.

 

    B. This bill also proposes to abolish the following circuit courts effective July 1, 2002:

 

Colfax - Cimarron circuit

Guadalupe - Vaughn circuit

McKinley - Thoreau circuit

Quay - San Jon circuit

Santa Fe - Pojoaque circuit

Taos - Questa circuit

Torrance - Estancia circuit

 

    C. In addition, the bill abolishes or converts the following circuits or courts on January 1, 2003:

 

Colfax - Springer court becomes a circuit court

Eddy - Artesia court becomes a circuit court

Grant - Bayard court abolished

Lea - Tatum & Eunice abolished

Jal -  circuit court closed

Carrizozo court becomes circuit.

 

II.  Senate Bill 4 also amends Section 35-1-29 NMSA 1978 to create and provide for an appropriation to the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) for an additional judgeship in the Santa Fe magistrate district.

 

The magistrate court judgeships are filled by appointment by the governor and serve until their successors have been elected and qualified in the next general election in 2002.  The elected magistrates’ term of office will begin on January 1, 2003.

 

The bill provides appropriations for salaries and benefits, supplies, furniture and equipment for the new judgeship in Santa Fe.  Moreover, a portion of the appropriation is for the District Attorneys and Public Defenders in the First District since they are affected by the additional judgeship.

The act contains an emergency clause so that provisions of this bill become effective immediately.

 

     Significant Issues

 

 

·       In 1998, the AOC completed a study to provide the Legislature with a standardized methodology for determining the needs for additional judgeships – the Weighted Caseload Study.  The study assigns a weight for each type of case heard in court.  The weight represents the average amount of judge’s time, expressed in minutes, that is necessary to process a case of that type.  Each weight is multiplied by the number of new cases filed per category.  Each fiscal year, caseload information is updated to reflect current court workloads. The results of the 2001 Weighted Caseload Study, prepared by the AOC, are attached to this analysis (Attachment A).

 

·       While there would be a net savings to the general fund by these court closures and elimination of judgeships, there may be an impact on the public and law enforcement officers who may have to travel additional miles to appear in court or may appear in a busy circuit court which the judge can only attend one or two days per week.  (See the column marked “miles to nearest open court” on top right-hand corner of Attachment B entitled “Court Expenses.”

 

Similarly, while two full-time judges in Lincoln and Grant county may not be statistically justified, a single judge in those counties will now have a judge need of .19, and .39, respectively, in their county immediately (according to the Weighted Caseload Study) and will also need to cover at least one additional location.  While Eddy and Colfax counties may not statistically have a need for a judge immediately with the removal of a judgeship, the geographical travel requirements create an additional burden on these judges.

 

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

 

**Of the appropriation of $278.0 contained in this bill, $242.0 is a recurring expense to the general fund, and $36.0 is non-recurring.  Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of FY03 shall revert to the general fund.

 

Below is a table outlining the appropriations’ distribution by agency.

 

 

Judgeships

Appropriation to Court

Appropriation to District Attorney

Appropriation to Public Defender

Total

 

Magistrate – Santa Fe (one judgeship)

99.1

75.9

103.0

278.0

 

 

By abolishing 14 magistrate courts and circuits, there will be a savings to the general fund totaling $900,941 according to AOC calculations.  Attachment B entitled “Court Expenses” itemizes the salary and expenses of each one accordingly.  The net general fund savings would be $622.9 .

 

DUPLICATION/RELATIONSHIP

 

This bill duplicates Senate Bill 55 in regards to requesting an appropriation to fund a judgeship for the Santa Fe magistrate court.

 

Funding for these courts being eliminated is currently included in the HAFC substitute for House Bill 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

 

POSSIBLE QUESTIONS

 

1. How will the elimination of certain judgeships affect the general elections for those districts?  Will residency or representation issues surface as a result of the provisions of this act ?

 

2.  What will be the average caseload per judge after all of the magistrate court changes take place?

 

3.  Discuss how the magistrate courts will take advantage of/increase the utilization of video arraignments in rural areas or in those towns where courts or judges or circuits were eliminated.  How will video arraignments help ?  hurt?   What is the current status of the video arraignment project ?

 

CMH/njw

Attachments

 [1]Begin typing on the * in replace mode.  Do not add or delete spaces.