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 Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
|
SPONSOR: |
Fidel |
DATE TYPED: |
03/08/03 |
HB |
|
||
|
SHORT TITLE: |
Redistricting Certain Judicial Districts |
SB |
864 |
||||
|
|
ANALYST: |
Hayes |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
|
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
|
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.1 |
Recurring |
General
Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases) $0.1
= Additional impact unknown
Relates to HB 127, SB 78 and SB
143
Responses
Received From
Administrative
Office of the Courts (AOC)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
Senate Bill 864
focuses on redistricting the First, Eleventh and Thirteenth Judicial District
Courts and providing for two district attorney divisions in the Thirteenth
Judicial District. Highlights of those
changes are outlined below:
Section 1. Amends
Section 34-6-1 to remove Sandoval county from the 13th Judicial District
and add it to the 1st Judicial District. It also removes McKinley county from the 11th Judicial
District and add it to the 13th Judicial District.
Section 2. Amends
Section 34-6-4 to increase the number of judges in the 1st Judicial
District from seven to nine district judges.
Section 3. Amends
Section 34-6-14 to decrease the number of judges from the 11th
Judicial District from six to four judges, and to eliminate the division
and the locations of where the judges must reside.
Section 4. Amends
Section 34-6-16 to change where the judges in division 2 and 5 of the 13th
Judicial District reside from Sandoval county to McKinley county.
Section 5. New
material in the bill creates two district attorney divisions in the 13th
Judicial District, one in Cibola and Valencia counties and one in McKinley
county.
Section 6A.
Temporary Provision transferring “all personnel, appropriations, money,
records, property, equipment and supplies of division two and five of the
thirteenth judicial district, as that district was composed on June 30, 2003,
shall be transferred to the division of the first judicial district that will
be officed in Sandoval county. All contracts,
agreements and docketed cases relating to the activities of the personnel and
records shall also be transferred.”
Section 6B.
Temporary Provision transferring “all personnel, appropriations, money,
records, property, equipment and supplies of division two and five of the
eleventh judicial district, as that district was composed on June 30, 2003,
shall be transferred to divisions two and fine of the thirteenth judicial district. All contracts, agreements and docketed cases relating to the
activities of the personnel and records shall also be transferred.”
The remainder of Section
6 authorizes the director of the Administrative Office of the Courts to
identify all personnel and property to be transferred. The director of the Administrative Office of
the District Attorney may transfer any personnel, appropriations or other
property necessary to further the purposes of this act. The Chief Public Defender may transfer any
personnel, appropriation or other property necessary to further the purposes of
this act.
Section 7. The
Temporary Provision states until the expiration of the term for which they were
elected:
a. The district judges of divisions
2 and 5 of the 13th Judicial District shall be the district judges
of the 1st Judicial District that will be housed in Sandoval county;
b. The district judges of
divisions 2 and 5 of the 11th
Judicial District shall be the district judges of the divisions 2 and 5
of the 13th Judicial District;
c. All other district
judges shall remain as judges in the district in which they were elected. The bill also addresses changes to the
district attorneys.
Section 8. This
section repeals Section 36-1-8.2 through 36-1-8.4. These sections address the current 11th Judicial
District Attorney divisions.
The effective date of
the provisions of this act is July 1, 2003.
Significant
Issues
1. Judgeship Needs. According to the Judiciary Unified Budget, the 11th Judicial District
Court needs an additional 2.38 judges/hearing officers and the 13th
Judicial District Court needs an additional 2.47 judges/hearing officers.
2. Effects on the District
Attorneys. Any judicial redistricting will also impact
the districts of the district attorneys.
The Constitution of New Mexico requires a district attorney for each
judicial district. Most district
judges’ retention elections are in 2002.
District attorneys’ elections are in 2004. The year 2008 is the first year both the courts and the district
attorneys are elected simultaneously.
3. Prior Judicial
Redistricting. The last judicial redistricting took place
in July, 1971. At that time, the 12th
and the 13th districts were created. Under the statute, one sitting district judge was “redesignated”
to serve the remainder of his term, from July 1 of that year until the end of
December, as district judge from the newly-created 12th Judicial
District Court. In addition, the
Legislature created a new judgeship in the 3rd and 13th
districts and a new district attorney for the 12th and the 13th
districts.
4. Effects on Voters. If the Legislature realigns the judicial
districts anytime prior to the 2007 legislative session, district attorneys and
district court judges would be redesignated in the middle of their terms. If this realignment bill were enacted this
year, district attorneys and district court judges in the affected districts
would be handling cases in counties whose citizens had no role in electing
them. Even in the 11th
district-- the only district that has more than one district attorney-- the
district attorneys must be elected by all the electors of the 11th
district, not just the electors of his or her respective county.
5. Other Redistricting
Effects. Besides the judges and the district
attorneys, any change in a district will impact the public defenders office,
the State Bar, other executive agencies and the public. When the Legislature has redistricted in the
past, it has hired an expert consultant, forms committees and holds meetings
throughout the state to get public input.
The Legislature may want to consider a similar process if it wishes to
pursue redistricting of the judiciary.
6. County Support. County governments in New Mexico are
responsible for the funding, construction, utilities and maintenance of all
district courthouses, not the State of New Mexico. Naturally, this legislation raises the question whether counties
or county finances have been taken into consideration. Are county officials in support of this
legislation?
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
Although there are no
appropriations associated with this bill, the changes outlined in this bill
will have a fiscal impact to certain districts. At this time, an estimate can not be provided.
RELATIONSHIP
HB 127 and SB 78
divide the current 11th Judicial District so that the 11th
district is composed solely of McKinley county. A new 14th Judicial District will be created of which
San Juan county will become part.
(There are currently only 13 districts.)
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
1. Will judges who are changing districts need
to run in another partisan election if they have already won a partisan
election? Or will they run for retention in the new district?
CMH/sb