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 Lujan, B.

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

2/14/07

HB 1054

SHORT TITLE

Adult Mental Health Court Programs

SB

ANALYST C. Sanchez

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY07

FY08

NFI

$1,000.0

Recurring

General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Relates to HB 148, 13

th

District Mental Health Court; and SB 206, 1

st

Judicial District Mental

Health Court

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Corrections Department (CD)

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

House Bill 1054 would appropriate $1,000,000 from the general fund to the administrative office

of the courts (AOC) for expenditure in FY 08 to provide staff, contractual services, and other

operating costs for adult mental health court programs in the state. Judicial districts would

petition the AOC for distribution of these mental health court funds. Any unexpended or

unencumbered balance remaining at the end of FY 08 would revert to the general fund.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

Implementing a mental health court program at a judicial district court requires staff, treatment

funds, other contractual services, and operating costs. The exact amount required will vary from

court to court, mostly depending on what resources may already be available at the court, and the

cost and availability of treatment in that court’s community.

House Bill 1054 – Page

2

As one example, the First Judicial District is currently requesting $250,000 to start a mental

health court program in Santa Fe (SB 206). Based on that amount, HB 1054 could fund

approximately four mental health programs around the state. Some funds may be deemed

necessary at the AOC level for administrative purposes (see Administrative Implications), which

could affect the total number of programs that could be funded by HB 1054.

The cost of incarcerating mentally ill offenders in jail will be reduced substantially due to their

earlier release from jail and effective use of existing resources in the community. The costs of

treatment while inmates are incarcerated will be avoided which, while not affecting the court

budget, will be a cost avoidance for the counties, since Medicare/Medicaid benefits stop while

people are incarcerated.

It is likely that some of the individuals who would be adjudicated under programs funded

through HB 1054 would be Medicaid-eligible recipients. If this were the case, any monies used

to provide mental health services that are part of the State Medicaid benefit package would be

eligible for Federal match. The number of eligible clients and the amount of this impact cannot

be readily determined.

The state will likely avoid future costs as the program successfully serves more clients.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

Mental health courts are part of the growing national trend towards therapeutic justice programs,

or problem-solving courts, which are modeled on the nationally successful drug court programs.

Like drug courts, mental health courts combine treatment with the coercive power of the

judiciary and close supervision to ensure participants adhere to the treatment plan and other

program requirements.

As with drug courts, mental health courts require close collaboration between the courts, the

public defender’s and district attorney’s offices. Because of the time demands of such programs,

mental health court budgets often include funds for all three agencies. Such programs also

require treatment staff, in the form of psychologists or psychiatrists, family counselors, as well as

court staff to administer and run the program who are trained for mental health diversion or

supervised release services. This legislation is not contained in the judiciary’s unified budget,

though the $250,000 requested by the First Judicial District Court to fund its mental health

program (SB 206) is in the unified budget.

According to the Administrative Office of the Courts, untreated or inadequately treated offenders

with mental illness usually re-offend. The Mental Health programs will reduce the number of

offenders with mental illness who are jailed repeatedly. . . “The revolving door." This

occurrence increases the risk to the community and perpetuates chronic re-entry into the criminal

justice system.

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

The courts are participating in performance based budgeting. This bill may have an impact on

the measures of the district courts in the following areas:

House Bill 1054 – Page

3

•

cases disposed as a percentage of cases filed

•

percent change in case filings by case types

The success of the programs will be measured by tracking the success of treatment and

medication compliance and continued checking of court records for recidivism.

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

The administrative implications of HB 1054 on the AOC could be significant, but would be

appropriate given the growing interest throughout the state in mental health courts. The AOC and

the Supreme Court have staff and a committee dedicated to oversight of the state’s drug court

programs, providing standardized operational guidelines and vetting program funding requests as

part of the Judiciary’s Unified Budget. HB 1054 would require similar administrative oversight

of the funds and the requesting programs, oversight which would strain current staff and require

additional committee work.

There would also be an immediate administrative impact on each court operating a mental health

court program, resulting from added judicial and staff time needed to dispose of these types of

cases in keeping with the dictates of the mental health court program. Over the long term,

successful treatment of program participants should lead to a decrease in court workload as such

participants recover sufficiently to lead more normal, law-abiding lives.

CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP

HB 148 13

th

District Mental Health Court, and SB 206 1

st

Judicial District Mental Health Court.

OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

It is unclear if the bill will require the Corrections Department to somehow participate in the

programs. These programs could require probation and parole officers to provide intensive

supervision to certain offenders in the programs, and this could cause an administrative or fiscal

burden on the Department. There is no appropriation in the bill to cover any increased costs to

the Department. However, the bill may not involve any participation by the Department. It is

difficult to assess the impact of the programs on the Department at this time.

ALTERNATIVES

Perhaps clarify the purpose and scope of the mental health court programs.

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL

Offenders with mental illness will remain in jail longer than required due to insufficient staff to

arrange for aftercare.

CS/nt