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 |
Harden |
DATE TYPED |
|
HB |
|
||
SHORT
TITLE |
9th |
SB |
431 |
||||
|
ANALYST |
Koplik |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY04 |
FY05 |
FY04 |
FY05 |
||
|
$242.4 |
|
|
Recurring
|
General
Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Relates
to Appropriation in the General Appropriation Act
LFC Files
Responses
Received From
Administrative
Office of the Courts
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
Senate Bill 431
appropriates $242.4 from the general fund to the 9th Judicial
District Court for the purpose of establishing a drug court.
Significant Issues
Drug court-imposed
treatment has proven to be an effective method in rehabilitating the lifestyle
of a drug offender and in preventing future illegal behavior. According to two
national studies conducted on drug court effectiveness,* the following conclusions
were reported:
1. Drug
courts continue to be successful in reducing drug use. 2. Drug courts are treating more complex
offenders with more serious criminal histories and with complex physical and
mental health needs. 3. Drug use for
drug court participants remains low compared to similar defendants not in drug
court. 4. Recidivism for participants
while in the program (as defined by re-arrests) continues to remain low for
graduates. 5. Estimates indicate that
drug court programs generate a cost-savings primarily to law enforcement,
probation and jail. For every $1.00 spent on drug court, $2.50 is saved. *National study in 1998 and
1999 by the
According to the Administrative Office of the Court’s statewide drug court
coordinator, drug courts have significantly reduced costs in the criminal
justice system. The average cost of a drug court program per participant
is $1,900 - $2,500 each year (treatment
costs only). This is significantly less than the average cost of $27,000
for one prisoner incarcerated in a non-treatment venue as
estimated by the New Mexico Department of Corrections.
In capturing full cost per participant, it is estimated that each drug court
participant costs the state approximately $3,300 each according to analyst
calculations.
With the advent of the Accountability in Government Act, drug court programs
lend themselves to performance measurement and assessment. Using the
above-reported nationwide findings, specific performance-based budgeting
measures can be developed for New Mexico drug court programs such as:
recidivism rates, cost per participant, number of re-arrests per participant,
number of positive urinalysis, average length of treatment, rate of
success/failure, number of drug offenders participating in drug court, etc.
With the major funding expansion proposed in this bill, the performance of drug
court should be closely evaluated, both for its cost effectiveness and the
cost-benefit to the state.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The appropriation of
$242.4 thousand contained in this bill is a recurring expense to the general
fund. Any unexpended or unencumbered
balance remaining at the end of FY 2005 shall revert to the general fund.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
This drug court expansion
has not been approved by the Chief Judges Council for FY 2005. The drug court coordinator explains that although
fully supportive of the spread of drug courts throughout the state, the Chief
Judges Council has a process by which the courts prepare to start a drug court. First, the district works with the Supreme
Court’s Drug Court Advisory Committee to develop the local resources and drug
court team necessary to the workings of a drug court. In turn, the judiciary makes these requests
part of its unified budget request and consolidates requests for new drug
courts and funds for expansions of existing drug courts into a single appropriation. This is done in order to provide a mechanism
by which the judiciary can help manage the growth of drug courts and their
additional administrative demands, as well as keep the legislature informed of
upcoming funding requests related to drug courts. The appropriations are requested
from the general fund to the administrative office of the courts to provide
centralized administration of drug court funds.
SK/njw