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 Maestas

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

01/28/08

01/31/08 HM 22

SHORT TITLE Traffic Offense Decrimilization Task Force

SB

ANALYST Escudero

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY08

FY09

NFI

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

RELATES TO: HM 19 and SM 14

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

Administrative Office of District Attorney (AODA)

No Response Received From

Public Defender Department (PDD)

Attorney General Office (AOG)

Tax and Revenue Department (TRD)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

House Memorial 22 resolves that the Administrative Office of the Courts be requested to

convene a task force consisting of representatives from the NM Association of Counties, the NM

Municipal League, the Public Defender Department, the NM District Attorneys Association and

the Motor Vehicle Division of the Taxation and Revenue Department to study the feasibility of

and procedure for decriminalizing traffic offenses and recasting traffic violations as civil

infractions.

The memorial further resolves that a representative of the task force report on the study and any

recommendations to the appropriate interim legislative committee no later than November 2008.

House Memorial 22 – Page

2

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

According to AOC, there will be an indirect fiscal impact upon the judiciary, whose staff must

assist in convening the requested task force.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

According to AODA, at its basic level, this would take time away from the various agencies

tasked from other duties to participate in a Task Force where a simpler data collection method

might prove more illuminating. All magistrate courts keep records of offenders and

outcomes. A data search could easily show which “traffic" crimes are showing jail time at

the outset, for contempt, etc.

Looking down the line to the purpose/outcome of the Task force: What is a “traffic

offense". Unclear how this would impact costs, without more information on what is considered

a “traffic offense". If it contemplates only the simplest offenses, such as speeding, changing the

penalties would have a negligible impact on costs as a) judges don’t put violators of these laws in

jail, anyway and b) if it were purely civil (money) liability, judges would still do what they do

now, and which is usually the only reason these violators see jail time: put violators in jail for

failure to pay fines. These costs are then borne by the Counties as the cost of jailing the

offender, and by the state as the loss of collecting fine money; Prosecutors have no time for

handling these simple cases so it would not affect them.

If this bill included all crimes in the motor vehicle code, including the felony of leaving

the scene of an accident with death or injuries, and DUI , homicide by motor vehicle, and

Revoked/Suspended License, it would greatly free up attorney time in the District Attorney

Offices as we handle huge numbers of these cases. However, that is NOT a desired outcome as

it would seriously undercut years of progress on these types of cases.

Would this include no jail time for persons in contempt of court for failing to pay fines.

Would this eliminate the need to give offenders jury trials in traffic courts. Regardless of

recidivism and public safety, are there other reasons habitual offenders should be incarcerated

(e.g. example to others, minor advantage to the public when not having an offender on the street,

etc.). Would it create an unfair disparity between people who reoffend and cannot pay, versus

better off individuals who can buy their way out of trouble.

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

According to AOC, the courts are participating in performance-based budgeting. It appears that

this legislation may have a minimal, if any, impact on performance measures as they relate to

judicial budgeting.

PME/bb:nt