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 Boykin

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

2/01/06

HB 51

SHORT TITLE NMSU Bioscience Research

SB

ANALYST Williams

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY06

FY07

$200.0

Recurring

General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Relates to Senate Bill 2 and House Bill 127

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Higher Education Department (HED)

New Mexico State University (NMSU)

Economic Development Department (EDD)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

House Bill 51 appropriates $200.0 thousand from the general fund to the board of regents of

New Mexico State University for the purpose of supporting collaborative bioscience research

with partners statewide to establish programs of cross-disciplinary teaching, research and indus-

try development in complex biological systems.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The appropriation of $200.0 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 2007 shall

revert to the general fund.

House Bill 51 – Page

2

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

NMSU notes this project would emphasize emerging insect-vectored diseases threatening human

and animal health (West Nile and Dengue Fever) as well as agricultural productivity (curly top

virus). NMSU notes 209 recent confirmed human cases and 400 equine cases of West Nile vi-

rus in New Mexico, and losses of 30 to 50 percent losses in certain, affected fields.

NMSU is seeking to create a “Center for Emerging Diseases” and will also seek federal funding

for the proposal. Funds would be used to conduct a baseline survey to determine which viral

strains are in the state, determine how these strains are evolving, how they are maintained and

how they are spreading across international borders.

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

HED requests a plan for program evaluation, including specific program goals and criteria for

assessing program effectiveness be submitted by October 1, 2006. HED also notes a program

evaluation covering a three-year period should be submitted to LFC and HED by June 30, 2009

reporting program benefits.

OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

EDD notes bioscience will likely drive the US economy for many years, including biotechnology

and biomedicine. In 2002 there were approximately 90 biotechnology/biomedical companies in

New Mexico with a workforce of approximately 2,400.

ALTERNATIVES

In 2003, the legislation established the technology enhancement fund, administered by the com-

mission on higher education, to support innovative, applied research to enhance the state’s eco-

nomic growth pursuant to the recommendations of the blue ribbon task force on the higher edu-

cation funding formula. House Bill 391 (Chapter 367) identified specific research areas includ-

ing agriculture, biotechnology, biomedicine, energy, materials science, microelectronics, water

resources, aerospace, telecommunications and manufacturing science.

Grants from the technology enhancement fund are to be made available to the state’s research

universities collaborating with corporate and nonprofit organizations. The commission on higher

education is directed to award grant funds on a competitive basis with review by a panel of sci-

entific and business experts. The award process would consider excellence in research design

and innovation in cross-disciplinary, multi-campus and higher education-industry research col-

laboration. The university must have matching funds from non-state sources. To date, monies

have not been appropriated to the fund.

Higher education institutions receive indirect cost revenues from federal contracts and grants.

Further, this money is unrestricted in the sense that the governing board of the institution has the

flexibility to choose which projects are supported with these funds One of the purposes of re-

taining these funds is to provide seed money and matching funds for projects such as those pro-

posed in this bill.

House Bill 51 – Page

3

Further, Laws of 2005, Chapter 81 (Senate Bill 169) authorized in state statute the Technology

Research Collaborative (TRC), with the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology acting

as fiscal agent. The TRC was formed in 2003. TRC members include the state’s national labo-

ratories, major research institutes and three research universities: University of New Mexico,

New Mexico State University and New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. General

purposes of the collaborative are:

•

Establishing advanced technology centers

•

Developing, creating and commercializing new intellectual property

•

Encouraging new opportunities for business and increased jobs

•

Creation of a workforce to support new enterprises based on intellectual property

POSSIBLE QUESTIONS

1.

What were the performance outcomes and economic impacts of the $30.9 million of state

funds previously provided to the state’s Centers of Excellence.

2.

Is this program related to existing state government and university initiatives.

3.

How does the this program compare/contrast with the Technology Research Collabora-

tive and the BioTeP initiative task force.

4.

Does the proposal incorporate best practices evident for economic development initia-

tives in other states. What examples can be provided.

5.

How would the proposed program impact the New Mexico economy. What is the time

frame for specific, achievable results.

6.

How would rural communities benefit.

7.

What is the total estimated cost of the initiative and the state’s share.

8.

How would funding be allocated between partners.

9.

What percentage of funding would be used for administrative costs overall.

10.

Can a non-state funds matching requirement be included in the bill.

11.

How would planning and accountability be addressed. How would progress and out-

comes be measured and promulgated.

AW/yr