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 for
other purposes.
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 in
SPONSOR: |
Tinnin |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
127/aHJC |
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Create 14th Judicial District |
SB |
|
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Hayes |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
$240.0 |
|
See Narrative |
Recurring |
General
Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Duplicates SB 78
Conflicts with SB 143 and SB 864
Relates
to Appropriation in the General Appropriation Act
Responses
Received From
Administrative
Office of the Courts (AOC)
Administrative
Office of the District Attorneys (AODA)
Public
Defender Department (PDD)
Eleventh
Judicial District
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of HJC Amendment
The House Judiciary Committee amended the amount
of the general fund appropriation in HB 127.
The cost to the state for splitting the 11th Judicial
District Court and creating a 14th Judicial District Court in $90.0 to
$240.0.
Synopsis
of Original Bill
House Bill 127 amends
Section 34-6-1 NMSA 1978 regarding the judiciary so that the 11th
Judicial District Court would contain only the
The 11th
district would have two judges instead of six if this legislation is enacted,
and the new 14th district
HB 127 also
appropriates $90.0 from the general fund to the Administrative Office of the
Courts (
The effective date of
the bill is
Significant Issues
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS *
A portion of the $90.0
appropriation is for the non-recurring costs of changing stationary, telephone
and fax numbers, computer/database access, internet connectivity, financial accounts,
payroll, webpage, etc. The remaining
portion of the $90.0 is a safety measure for one additional FTE. Any unexpended or unencumbered balance
remaining at the end of fiscal year 2004 shall revert to the general fund.
The reallocation of existing
personnel from
Attached is a
spreadsheet prepared by Weldon Neff, court administrator for the Eleventh
Judicial District, which documents the current and proposed staffing roster
with respect to the Eleventh and proposed Fourteenth Judicial Districts.
According to Mr. Neff, the cost of additional personal would total
$423,342. However, as indicated by Mr.
Neff, one financial specialist position from
The Administrative
Office of the Courts states that the $90.0 appropriation in this bill to assist
with the transfer and creation of a 14th district is
insufficient. According to the AOC, the creation of another
judicial district will require the establishment of separate offices,
procedures and management of all administrative functions, including budget
preparation, fiscal services and human resource management. In order for both
courts to operate independently and effectively, AOC believes that additional
staff and funding are needed totaling $510,061.
DUPLICATION, CONFLICT
SB 78 duplicates HB
127.
SB 143 proposes
increasing the number of judgeships in the 11th district from six to
eight. The bill specifically increases
the number of judges in
TECHNICAL ISSUES
The current General Appropriation Act has
approximately $3.5 million for the 11th Judicial District
Court. If this legislation is enacted,
the 11th district’s appropriation will need to be reduced and some
portion reallocated and appropriated to the new14th district.
A legislative option is to change the effective date from
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
1. On what basis is a 14th Judicial District
needed? Geographic size? Caseload?
Residency requirements?
Population growth? What is the
goal of creating the new district ?