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 Tripp

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

1-22-07

HB 180

SHORT TITLE Illegal Dumping Task Force

SB

ANALYST Aubel

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY07

FY08

100.0

Non-Rec

General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT (dollars in thousands)

FY07

FY08

FY09 3 Year

Total Cost

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

Total

Indeterminate* Indeterminate*

Recurring General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

*See Fiscal Implications

Companion to House Joint Memorial 6

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)

Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD)

New Mexico Association of Counties (NMAC)

Commissioner of Public Lands (CPL)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

House Bill 180 appropriates $100.0 thousand from the general fund to NMED in FY08 to form a

task force on illegal dumping.

House Bill 180 – Page

2

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The appropriation of $100.0 thousand to NMED contained in this bill is a non-recurring expense

to the general fund. Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of FY08

shall revert to the general fund. NMED noted that the funds will be used by the Solid Waste

Bureau to perform administrative tasks associated with developing a task force in FY08 and does

not anticipate additional costs.

EMNRD pointed out that the bill funds the agency organizing the task force (NMED), but that

each entity participating in the task force will incur costs that are not funded. As currently

written, the appropriation does not appear to extend to any other agency, such as would be the

case through a specific Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). The cost for additional agencies

involved in the task force would depend on the number of participating entities funded from state

funds and the extent of their participation.

In addition, it is likely that additional budget impact will be experienced by the agencies

involved in implementing the task force recommendations, and that such amounts would be

recurring as an ongoing, coordinated illegal dumping program starting in FY09. These recurring

funds would depend on the scope of the coordinated program, the number of state-funded

agencies involved, and whether the cost was incremental due to the expansion of current efforts

or addition of new activities relating to illegal dumping mitigation. It is also possible that an

agency with a current illegal dumping program experiences a reduction in cost due to economies

of scale, or that duplicative efforts across agencies are curtailed, thus producing cost savings.

Unless a clearly-defined mapping of strategic implementation is developed, future costs remain

indeterminate.

Except for NMED, no responding agency identified specific dollar impacts for either the task

force portion in FY08 or the ongoing program portion beginning in FY09.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

NMED stated that illegal dumping is a serious and chronic problem in New Mexico and that it

has aggressively sought to educate municipal and county governments, Native American tribes,

and other state agencies regarding abatement of illegal dump sites at illegal dumping summits for

the last five years. NMED believes that the creation of a task force on illegal dumping is the

next step that is needed to continue, support and enhance these state-wide efforts.

CPL also stated that it has taken a proactive role in the effort to eradicate illegal dumping from

state trust lands, with no fiscal impact to the general fund. The agency related through

partnerships with a broad array of entities, 12,000 tons of trash has been cleared from 883 acres

of trust lands. These projects included solid waste removal, hazardous material removal,

“caliche" pit cleanup and contouring, fencing and gates, reclamation and education outreach.

The NMAC pointed out that by forming a statewide Illegal Dumping Task Force, local, state and

federal entities could utilize shared resources and leverage possible additional funding.

House Bill 180 – Page

3

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

NMED stated that would be no negative performance implications. EMNRD reported that such

a task force may indirectly benefit the Oil Conservation Division, because its duties include

prevention of illegal dumping of oilfield wastes.

A performance measure tracking the effectiveness of implementing the task force

recommendations could be tied to any appropriation and would presumably measure any

reduction in illegal dumping incidents within the New Mexico.

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

Without funding, it is likely that agencies other than NMED would have only minimal

participation. Without laying the groundwork for implementing the task force recommendations

as part of the original appropriation, the task force product may have minimal impact on

reducing illegal dumping.

CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP

A companion bill, HJM 6, requests that NMED and other entities create a “coalition" to study

illegal dumping.

TECHNICAL ISSUES

EMNRD noted that HB180 appropriates funds for the creation of a “task force", while another

bill, HJM 6, requests a “coalition" of various entities to study illegal dumping and present a

strategic plan. It appears that HB 180 is the appropriation bill for the coalition, but because HJM

6 uses the term “coalition" and HB180 uses the term “task force," that relation is unclear. There

is no language in HB 180 tying the appropriation to the successful passage of HJM 6.

It is also unclear what happens if HJM 6 is not adopted. HB 180 will then be funding a “task

force" on illegal dumping, but NMED will have no guidance on who is to be included in the task

force or what the task force is supposed to do. EMNRD also pointed out that “illegal dumping"

is not clearly defined in either HJM 6 or HB 180, and that such guidance to the task force or

coalition is therefore lacking.

ALTERNATIVES

Convene a task force on a volunteer basis, such as the task force convened pursuant to the 2006

HM 5 to prepare a strategic plan regarding mercury reduction.

House Bill 180 – Page

4

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL

EMNRD noted that if HJM 6 were adopted, but not HB 180, NMED would not have the

resources to carry out the requested activities. NMED maintained that if this bill is not passed,

NMED would be denied the state-wide opportunity to tie together the collective talents and

expertise of numerous parties interested in eradicating illegal dumping.

Individual, piecemeal

endeavors would continue, but the potential for a larger, stronger, and more significant and

effective abatement efforts against illegal dumping would be lost. NMAC similarly stated that

without the formation of a statewide Illegal Dumping Task Force, illegal dumping initiates will

most likely result in less effective outcomes and an increased cost for local, state and federal

entities.

MA/nt