Fiscal impact
reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for
standing finance committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they are used for other
purposes.
Current FIRs (in
HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are available on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us). Adobe PDF versions include all attachments,
whereas HTML versions may not.
Previously issued FIRs and attachments may also be obtained from the LFC
in
SPONSOR |
Swisstack |
DATE TYPED |
|
HB |
HJM 28 |
||
SHORT
TITLE |
District Attorney & Defender Retirement
Plan |
SB |
|
||||
|
ANALYST |
|
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY04 |
FY05 |
FY04 |
FY05 |
||
|
|
|
See Narrative |
|
|
LFC Files
Responses
Received From
Public
Employees Retirement Association (PERA)
Administrative
Office of the Courts (
Public
Defender Department (PDD)
Administrative
Office of the District Attorneys (
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
House Joint Memorial 28 requests the PDD and the
Significant Issues
The PDD and the District Attorneys’ offices have
difficulty attracting and retaining qualified attorneys because of their
non-competitive salaries. The PDD
believes a twenty-year retirement plan would be an incentive to pursue
long-term careers as public defenders or district attorneys.
PERA questions whether assistant public
defenders and assistant district attorneys should be afforded the benefits of a
20-year retirement plan. The recitals in
the memorial that support the need for a study are based on factors relating to
the difficulty of recruitment and retention of public law practice attorneys by
the Public Defender Department and the judicial districts represented by the Court
of Appeals.
Currently, under State General Plan 3, public
defenders and assistant district attorneys are eligible to retire at any age
with 25 or more years of service credit, have a 3% pension factor and their
retirement benefit is capped at 80% of their final average salary. Under State General Plan 3, members
contribute 7.42% of their salary and their employer pays 16.59 % of salary in
contributions.
In November 2002, the
The PERA Board has adopted a position not to
endorse any further benefit enhancement legislation until sufficient experience
is gained to determine the actuarial impact of benefit enhancements passed
during recent legislative sessions.
Public retirement plan design is a function of the PERA Board as
trustees of the retirement fund and should not be altered to address
recruitment or retention obstacles. It
is inappropriate to use the PERA retirement plan to address the personnel
shortages and obstacles experienced by specific state agencies or local public
bodies. PERA’s defined benefit plan, and
the legislature’s plan enhancements over time, already provides powerful
employment incentives.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
There is no
appropriation to fund this study. The
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
PERA will be required
to coordinate an actuarial study between the PDD and the
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
Where will the funds to pay for the actuarial study come from?
DW/yr