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 a vailable 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 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 Irwin

DATE TYPED 02/20/05 HB 60/aHJC

SHORT TITLE Juvenile Justice Continuum in 6

th

District

SB

ANALYST McSherry

APPROPRIATION

Appropriation Contained Estimated Additional Impact Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY05

FY06

FY05

FY06

NFI

$340.0

Recurring General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Administrative Office of the Courts

Public Defender

Administrative Office of the District Attorneys

SUMMARY

Synopsis of HJC Amendment

The amendment adopted by the House Judiciary Committee adds the term: court after the word

district on page 1, line 17. This is a clarifying amendment.

Synopsis of Original Bill

House Bill 60, making an Appropriation for the Juvenile Justice Continuum of Services in the

Sixth Judicial District appropriates $340 thousand from the general fund to the 6

th

Judicial Dis-

trict. Any funds remaining at the end of fiscal year 2006 would revert to the general fund. These

funds would be recurring in order to continue a program which has existed for seven years

through federal funds.

Significant Issues.

According to the AOC, the intention of this bill is for the 6

th

Judicial District Court to be the dis-

tributing point for the requested funds, but would not actually administer the proposed program

components. Agreements with city/county fiscal agents in Grant, Hidalgo and Luna counties

would have to be made in order to distribute the funds for the proposed programs. The AOC re-

House Bill 60/aHJC -- Page 2

ports that 75 or more organizations have participated in providing the services and programs in-

cluded in the Juvenile Justice Continuum of Services program.

Currently the Juvenile Justice Continuum of Services program has an annual budget of $250

thousand which has been distributed through the New Mexico Juvenile Justice Advisory Com-

mittee with federal Office Juvenile Justice Delinquency Program grants. The AOC reports that

JJAC cannot provide any more federal funding as of July 1, 2005 and that the federal funds are

“seed funding.” The requested $340 thousand in general fund transfers include $90 thousand ex-

pansion funding to the existing program.

According to the AOC, the Sixth Judicial District implemented the “Juvenile Justice Continuum

of Services” in order to reduce its severe problems with juvenile crime. The AOC asserts that

the Continuum of Services is a comprehensive strategy that helps a community to develop pro-

grams in juvenile justice ranging from punitive to preventive. The four phases of the program

are described as follows:

detention (local and commitments to state facilities), intervention (pro-

bation, community service, electronic monitoring, Teen Court, et cetera), prevention (DWI

Councils, Teen Outreach Program, Safe Schools Initiative, et cetera), and positive youth devel-

opment (mentorship, sports, after-school programs, et cetera).

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

According to the study report produced by CYFD and Luna County, since the initiation of the

Continuum program, there has been a 61% reduction in property offense, a 38% reduction in of-

fenses against persons, a 62% reduction in repeated offenders, a 63% reduction in total delin-

quent offenses, a 56% reduction in petitions filed, and a 85% reduction in commitments to state

facilities.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The appropriation of $340 thousand contained in this bill is a recurring expense to the general

fund. Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of fiscal year 2006 shall

revert to the general fund. A proposed budget for the funds is included on page 22 of the at-

tached “Economics of Juvenile Justice.”

During the six-year time period from 1997 to 2003, CYFD and Luna County estimate that the

Sixth Judicial District juvenile court has saved: $455,918 in law enforcement costs to police de-

partments and sheriff departments in Luna, Hidalgo, and Grant Counties, $4,188,675 in victim

costs of time lost from work, healthcare costs, and property damage in Luna, Hidalgo, and Grant

Counties, and to New Mexico assistance agencies, such as Children, Youth & Families Depart-

ment, the Behavioral Health Services Department, and the Department of Health, $8,531,911 in

long-term commitments to New Mexico state juvenile detention facilities, and $5,375,427 in ad-

judication costs to the Sixth Judicial District and state of New Mexico in the reduction of juve-

nile petitions.

In 2001, the total cost savings reported by the AOC from the implementation of the 6

th

Judicial

District Juvenile Justice Continuum of Services was $3.4 million. The agencies in the State of

New Mexico, primarily CYFD, report receiving a direct savings of 50% or $1.7 million in the

district.

House Bill 60/aHJC -- Page 3

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

The Sixth Judicial District Court would have the increased administrative duties of entering into

financial contracts with the three proposed counties or cities which would actually be the coordi-

nating entities for the proposed programs.

TECHNICAL ISSUES

House Bill 60 refers to the Sixth Judicial District, however, the intent of the bill is to appropriate

funds to the Sixth Judicial District Court.

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL.

According to the AOC, if state funds are not appropriated to the 6

th

Judicial District Juvenile Jus-

tice Continuum of Services, some, if not all, services will cease.

POSSIBLE QUESTIONS

Why is the Sixth Judicial District Court considered the best entity to receive and manage the

funds for this program if none of the programs will be administered by the court.

What role, if any, will the Sixth Judicial District Court have in tracking performance of this pro-

gram.

EM/lg:yr:njw