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 Ingle
DATE TYPED 2/9/05
HB
SHORT TITLE Additional Ninth District Judge
SB 379
ANALYST McSherry
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation Contained Estimated Additional Impact Recurring
or Non-Rec
Fund
Affected
FY05
FY06
FY05
FY06
$312.4
Recurring General Fund
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Senate Bill 379 relates to other bills proposing to increase the number of judgeships at certain
courts: SB 26, Additional Guadalupe District Magistrate, HB 476 Additional Santa Fe Magistrate
Judge, SB 25, Additional 4
th
District Judge.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
LFC Files
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)
Administrative Office of the District Attorneys (AODA)
Department of Public Safety (DPS)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
Senate Bill 379 appropriates $312.4 thousand from the general fund to the Ninth Judicial District
Court for the purpose of creating an additional judgeship, to the existing three judges, and fund-
ing the support staff associated with the additional judgeship. The bill proposes to fund: salaries,
benefits, furniture, supplies, and equipment for the proposed district judge and support staff.
Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of the fiscal year 2006 shall re-
vert to the general fund. The effective date of this Act is July 1, 2005.
Significant Issues.
In November 1998, the judiciary updated a “weighted caseload study” which was designed to
provide a methodology for determining the distribution of needs for additional judgeships. This
type of study assigns a weight, expressed in minutes, for each type of case heard in a court. The
weight represents the average amount of judge’s time found to be necessary to process a case of
pg_0002
Senate Bill 379 -- Page 2
a particular type. Each weight is multiplied by the number of new cases filed per category. At-
tached are the findings of the study.
According to the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), the Chief Judges Council reviewed
all district, metropolitan, and magistrate judgeship requests statewide and considered both the
need as determined by the Weighted Caseload Study as well as additional narrative and testimo-
nial information. AOC states the Weighted Caseload Study for judges reflects a total need for 23
new judgeships and that the judiciary is requesting the twelve most critically needed judgeships
in FY 06 prioritized into a two tier system. Tier one consists of one Bernalillo County Metro-
politan Court Judge, two magistrate court judges located in the Santa Fe and San Juan Counties,
and three district court judges located in the Second, Ninth, and Eleventh Judicial Districts. Tier
two consists of two magistrate judges located in the Sandoval and McKinley Counties, one Ber-
nalillo County Metropolitan Court Judge, and three district court judges located in the Eleventh,
Thirteenth and Second Judicial Districts.
The results of the Weighted Caseload Study for this judgeship request are attached. The Ninth
Judicial District Court currently has 3 judges and the weighted caseload study indicates that the
court actually needs approximately 2 additional judgeships.
PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS
AOC reports that FY05 is the second year that the courts are participating in performance based
budgeting. This bill may have an impact on: cases disposed as a percent of cases filed, percent
change in case filings by case type, and clearance rate
If this judge hears criminal cases, the Public Defender asserts that the courtroom would need to
be staffed by the Public Defender Department and the district attorney to handle the cases.
The approval of this bill will add an additional District judge and support staff thus allowing
more cases to be heard in a timely manner and will help keep dockets from backing up. How-
ever, without additional resources to the District Attorney’s office it will be difficult to meet the
demands created by the new judgeship.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The appropriation of $312.4 contained in this bill is an expense to the general fund; According to
the AOC, $277.0 thousand would be recurring funds and $35.4 thousand in one-time expendi-
ture; this is not specified in the bill however. Any unexpended or unencumbered balance re-
maining at the end of 2006 shall revert to the general fund.
The Public Defender (PD) points out that there is no appropriation included in the proposed bill
for the Public Defender Department or the district attorney and that the number of criminal cases
the new judge will hear would determine the fiscal impact.
The Administrative Office of District Attorneys (AODA) asserts that the proposed new judge-
ship will create an additional workload for the DAs office but the bill does not contain an appro-
priation for an additional attorney, and equipment that would be necessary to handle the work.
pg_0003
Senate Bill 379 -- Page 3
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
According to the PD and AODA, an additional judge without resources for the DA or the PDD
will put further stress on the criminal justice system in the 9
th
Judicial District.
The AOC asserts that the primary long-term administrative effect on the court, upon passage of
this bill, would be more efficient and expeditious disposal of cases.
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
Senate Bill 379 relates to other bills proposing to increase the number of judgeships at certain
courts: SB 26, Additional Guadalupe District Magistrate, HB 476 Additional Santa Fe Magistrate
Judge, SB 25, Additional 4
th
District Judge.
WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL.
According to the AOC, if Senate Bill 397 does not pass, there is a possibility of having an over-
load in the District court and having cases dismissed due to time limits. The agency also cites
less efficient and less expeditious disposal of cases and court administration.
If this bill is not passed there will likely be another proposed judgeship bill including a proposed
Ninth District Judge.
EM/yr
Attachment
pg_0004
Senate Bill 379 -- Page 4
ATTACHMENT
Judge and Staff Need for District Courts and Metropolitan Court
for FY 06
Agency
Judges/Hearing Officers
Judge
Need
1
(based
on
weighted
caseload
study)
Current
Actual
Judges
Hearing Offi-
cers/Special
Masters
2
(at
66% of judge
weight)
Gap
(negative
number
denotes
need)
First Judicial District
8.72 7.00
1.33
(0.39)
Second Judicial District
29.82 23.00
4.66
(2.16)
Third Judicial District
8.30 7.00
0.66
(0.64)
Fourth Judicial District
2.58 2.00
0.34
(0.24)
Fifth Judicial District
10.25 8.00
0.00
(2.25)
Sixth Judicial District
3.86 3.00
0.00
(0.86)
Seventh Judicial District
3.22 3.00
0.66 0.44
Eighth Judicial District
2.82 2.00
1.00 0.18
Ninth Judicial District
5.53 3.00
0.54
(1.99)
Tenth Judicial District
1.22 1.00
0.11
(0.11)
Eleventh Judicial District
9.66 6.00
0.66
(3.00)
Twelfth Judicial District
4.56 4.00
0.66 0.10
Thirteenth Judicial District
8.55 6.00
1.33
(1.22)
DISTRICT POSITIONS NEEDED
4
:
12
Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court
18.68 16.00
(2.68)
1
Weighted Caseload Study for judges revisited in 1998 by NM AOC and Heidi Green, National Center for State
Courts
2
Court Administrators provided information based on:
- if hearing officer/special master is shared with another district, FTE time was estimated
- hearing officers/special masters given credit of .66 of a district judge as authorized by Chief Judges Council on
May 21, 2004
4
Total Positions Needed (.5 or greater need rounded to the
next whole number.)