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

Cervantes

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

1/19/08

1/30/08 HB 142

SHORT TITLE

Judicial Performance Evaluation Fund

SB

ANALYST C. Sanchez

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY08

FY09

NFI

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Relates to $399 thousand appropriated for the Judicial Performance Evaluation Program in the

General Appropriation Act.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

State Treasurer

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

House Bill 142 creates a fund for the judicial performance evaluation program. The

administrative office of the courts shall administer the fund. Balances in the fund shall not revert

to the general fund at the end of any fiscal year.

Money in the fund is subject to appropriation by the legislature and shall be used by the

administrative office of the courts for the operation and costs of the judicial performance

evaluation commission to perform the duties required by the Supreme Court to evaluate

appellate, district and metropolitan court judges.

Payments from the fund shall be made upon vouchers issued and signed by the director of the

administrative office of the courts or the director’s designee upon warrants signed by the

secretary of finance and administration.

House Bill 142 – Page

2

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The number of judges’ evaluations fluctuates each year. The creation of the fund allows state

general funds appropriated to the administrative office of the courts to be available to cover the

costs when a large number of appellate, district, and metropolitan court judges are evaluated.

This bill creates a new fund and provides for continuing appropriations. The LFC has concerns

with including continuing appropriation language in the statutory provisions for newly created

funds, as earmarking reduces the ability of the legislature to establish spending priorities.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

Due to the varying lengths of terms among appellate (8 years), district (6 years), and

metropolitan court (4 years) judges, there are certain two-year spans in which the judicial

performance evaluation commission is required to conduct interim and/or final evaluations for all

judges and justices. This is in comparison to other two-year spans in which only one or two of

the different types of judges are being evaluated. A non-reverting fund allows the judicial

performance evaluation commission to have the funds necessary to do its work from one fiscal

year to the next, without having to revert funds in years with fewer evaluations and request

additional funds in busier years.

The administrative office of the courts seeks this non-reverting fund with the direction of the

Supreme Court. The Supreme Court’s Order of 2/12/97 requires the judicial performance

evaluation commission (JPEC) to conduct an evaluation of all appellate, district and metropolitan

court judges half way through their terms of office and before their retention election.

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

Judicial performance evaluation (JPE) programs carry several significant advantages. First,

every judge who is evaluated benefits from the feedback of the evaluation, and is given an

opportunity for self-improvement. Due to the nature of a judge’s professional relationship with

attorneys, court staff and litigants, it is often difficult for a judge to get constructive feedback on

his performance. JPE allows for anonymous feedback so judges can learn about strengths and

weaknesses of which they otherwise might not be aware.

Second, JPE provides a source of information to voters. In many cases, it is the only source of

information. Voters typically have no experience with individual judges, much less a sense of

which judges are doing a good job on the bench.

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

The Judicial Performance Evaluation Fund will be managed by the Administrative Office of the

Courts; and

Interest earnings on fund cash balances will be distributed to the Judicial Performance

Evaluation Fund by the State Treasurer’s Office.

House Bill 142 – Page

3

OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

House Bill 142 creates in the state treasury the Judicial Performance Evaluation Fund. Under the

Statewide Human Resource, Accounting, and Management Reporting System (SHARE), such

funds are established by the Department of Finance and Administration in SHARE. Prior to

SHARE, interest-bearing funds were created in the state treasury under the TRACS system.

Currently, DFA notifies the State Treasurer’s Office when a fund created by statute is established

in SHARE. Although the SHARE system has modified the manner in which funds are “created

in the treasury", the State Treasurer has the same statutory responsibilities and duties of

oversight and monthly interest allocations. Unless the creation of the Judicial Performance

Evaluation Fund creates an undue administrative burden (e.g.: cost) in the State Treasurer’s

Office Investment Division, there will be no fiscal impact to the Cash Management Division.

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL

Without non-reversion language, the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission will lose its

funding in years with fewer evaluations and have to obtain the funding lost to cover the costs

when a large number of judges are evaluated the following year. If the lost funding is not

recovered, the JPEC will need to decide what evaluations will be cut and what information, if

any, will be provided to the voters of New Mexico.

CS/nt:bb