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 Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

 

 

F I S C A L    I M P A C T    R E P O R T

 

 

 

SPONSOR

Smith

DATE TYPED

2/10/04

HB

 

 

SHORT TITLE

Allow District and Metro Court Elections, CA

SJR

4

 

 

ANALYST

Koplik

 

APPROPRIATION

 

Appropriation Contained

Estimated Additional Impact

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY04

FY05

FY04

FY05

 

 

 

See Narrative

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

 

INFORMATION

LFC Files

 

Response Received From

Administrative Office of the Courts

 

SUMMARY

 

Synopsis of Bill

 

Senate Joint Memorial 4 proposes amending Article 6 of the Constitution so that district court judges are subject to partisan elections every 6 years, and metropolitan court judges every four years.  It stipulates that when a district or metropolitan judge leaves office, the governor would appoint a temporary replacement until the next election, whereupon a successor would be chosen until the expiration of the original term.  Furthermore, the memorial would repeal Article 6, Sections 36 and 37 of the Constitution, which sets forth the district court and metropolitan court nominating commissions.           

 

It is proposed that this resolution should be brought before the electorate as a Constitutional amendment at the next general or special election. 

 

      Significant Issues

 

The Administrative Office of the Courts states that the current system for electing and retaining judges was put in place by a constitutional amendment in 1988.  The system has been augmented with the performance evaluation of judges.  There have been two retention elections that involved recommendations by the Judicial Performance Evaluation Committee.  At the 2002 general election, the Committee recommended that four judge not be retained.  Only one of the judges was retained.  If the current system for nominating judges is repealed, there is a possibility that the state will be the subject of several voting rights lawsuits.    

                                                                                   

The Administrative Office of the Courts cites a study of the American Judicature Society (found at www.ajs.org/selection/ms_descrip.pdf) entitled “Merit Selection: The Best Way to Choose the Best Judges” which explains that merit selection (the system currently used in New Mexico) searches for the most qualified candidates, de-politicizes the selection process, and helps to enable women and minority candidates.  

                                                           

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

 

While there would be a nominal impact to the general fund, the process of changing the structure of elections from retention to partisan could strongly impact individual judges, and perhaps their impartiality. 

 

Currently, the judicial nominating commissions are administered by the University of New Mexico’s Law School.

 

The Secretary of State notes it will cost $40 thousand for this constitutional amendment. 

 

SK/lg