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: |
Smith |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
|
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Increase 6th Judicial District |
SB |
176 |
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Hayes |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
$472.4 |
|
|
Recurring* |
General
Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Relates to SB143
Reponses
Received From
Administrative
Office of the Courts (AOC)
Public
Defender Department
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
Senate Bill 176 amends
Section 34-6-9 NMSA 1978 to increase the number of judgeships in the Sixth
Judicial District Court from two to three. The bill appropriates $271.4 to the 6th district
for salaries and benefits, furniture, supplies and equipment for one additional
judgeship and support staff. Other
appropriations outlined in SB176, totaling $201.0, provide for additional resources
for the district attorneys and public defenders in the 6th district.
The additional
judgeship would be filled by appointment by the governor pursuant to the provisions
of Article 6 of the Constitution of New Mexico for a term beginning
The effective date of
the provisions of SB176 is
Significant
Issues
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The appropriation of
$472.4 contained in this bill is a recurring* expense to the general fund.
Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of fiscal
year 2004 shall revert to the general fund.
*Part of the appropriations to the 6th
district court, district attorney and public defender is specifically for
furniture and equipment. These are
considered capital items (defined by DFA as purchases over $1,500) and are a
one-time expense. Therefore, a
portion of this appropriation must be designated as non-recurring.
Here is a table
delineating the appropriation amount to each agency noted in the bill:
SIXTH
DISTRICT APPROPRIATIONS
AGENY: |
Appropriation
to Court |
Appropriation to
District Attorney |
Appropriation
to Public Defender |
TOTAL |
AMOUNT: |
$271,400 |
$151,000 |
$50,000 |
$472,400 |
RELATIONSHIP
Senate Bill143, the
“judgeship bill,” provides for one additional judgeship at the Sixth Judicial
District Court. The appropriation amount
for the judge, staff, supplies, furniture and equipment is $293,290. There is also an appropriation in SB143 for
the district attorneys, but not for the public defenders.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
Besides clarification
of recurring vs. non-recurring amounts, references to “additional staff” or
“support staff” in the bill should be clarified by indicating the number of FTE
specifically being funded if those positions have not yet been delineated.
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS