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 Grubesic

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

1/27/2005

HB

SHORT TITLE 1

st

Judicial Staff Attorney

SB 304

ANALYST McSherry

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY06

FY07

$103.4

Recurring

General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Senate Bill 304 is a companion bill to House Bill 417 and duplicates the HAFC recommendation

for the General Appropriation Act.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

Senate Bill 304, appropriates $103,400 from the general fund to the first judicial district court

for the purpose of funding a full-time associate staff attorney.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The appropriation of $103,400 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.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

The funds for this purpose were recommended to be added to the LFC recommendation during

HAFC.

Senate Bill 304 – Page 2

According to the staffing study, when all 1

st

Judicial District employees are considered, the dis-

trict is more than 100 percent fully staffed (see attached).

The judiciary’s interpretation of the staffing study results in the 1

st

Judicial district with a 94.4

percent staffing level; this interpretation does not count all the court’s employees (see attached).

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

A staff attorney would assist the 1

st

Judicial District in research for complex cases and likely

would lessen the workload per case for the District’s judges.

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

Additional personnel increase the administrative workload of both the court and AOC.

CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP

Senate Bill 304 is a companion bill to House Bill 417 and duplicates an appropriation included in

the HAFC recommendation for the agency.

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL

The 1

st

Judicial District will likely still gain a staff attorney because it was the court’s first prior-

ity “add” in HAFC.

POSSIBLE QUESTIONS

1.

What size should a court be before gaining a staff attorney. Is there a staff attor-

ney/caseload ideal ratio. Does any court in the state meet this ratio. What district has the

best attorney/caseload ratio and what is the ratio.

2.

What other districts would qualify for a staff attorney under the ratio of staff attor-

ney/caseload that the 1

st

District would have with the proposed addition.

EM/mt