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 |
Picraux |
DATE TYPED |
|
HB |
178/aHTRC/aHFL |
||
SHORT
TITLE |
Local Option Quality of Life Gross Receipts |
SB |
|
||||
|
ANALYST |
|
|||||
REVENUE
Estimated Revenue |
Subsequent Years Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
|
FY04 |
FY05 |
|||
Indeterminate |
Indeterminate |
Indeterminate |
Recurring |
Local
Funds |
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)
Relates to HB44
LFC Files
SUMMARY
Synopsis of HFl Amendments
The House Floor amendments strike
HTRC amendments 1 and 2, and replaces them with language requiring that
revenue be dedicated to activities provided by a local government and to
cultural programs, events and activities.
The HTRC amendment allowed the money to also be used for recreational
programs. Other references to
recreational programs are also struck.
The bill also adds language that a goal of the
quality of life tax is that revenue be used for new programs or expansion of
existing programs and activities, and not to replace other funding sources.
It requires that one board member be appointed by
the governing body of the largest municipality in the county.
It allows all counties, except
It requires the cultural advisory board to review
and evaluate guidelines, procedures, funding criteria and allocation
percentages every four years.
Synopsis of HTRC Amendments
HTRC amendments makes several technical language
changes, including striking specific references to
It also requires that tax revenue be dedicated to
recreational programs and activities provided by a local government and to
cultural programs, events and activities provided by nonprofits or publicly
owned cultural organizations.
It allows board members to be removed for
malfeasance.
It tightens the procedures for awarding contracts.
Synopsis of Original
Bill
House
Bill 178 allows counties to impose a quality of life gross receipts tax. The tax must be enacted by ordinance before
The
bill requires that the tax be put before the voters of the county and approved
by majority vote. If approved by the voters, the tax becomes effective. If it fails, the county board may not propose
it again for at least one-year from the time of the election.
The
bill requires the county board to appoint county cultural advisory board within
sixty days of an election approving the tax.
The board is to consist of between nine and fifteen members with
staggered three-year terms. Members do
not sit at the pleasure of the county commission. The advisory board is responsible for making
budget recommendations and overseeing the distribution of funds in a manner
that is consistent with the goals of the quality of life gross receipts
tax. The board is required to develop
guidelines for applying and granting funds.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The fiscal impact of this bill is limited to
counties. The size of the impact is
indeterminate since it is unknown how many counties would choose to propose the
tax and whether voters in those counties would approve it. While TRD has not yet issued an FIR on this
bill, in other analyses, they have indicated that a one-eighth county gross
receipts tax could potentially raise $41.3 million in FY05, if all counties
imposed the tax. Thus, the maximum
potential revenue increase associated with this bill is $82.6 million, assuming
all counties imposed the tax.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
TRD has indicated on
similar bills that the administrative implications would be modest and could be
absorbed with existing resources.
BT/lg:dm