NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.

The LFC is only preparing FIRs on bills referred to the Senate Finance Committee, the Senate Ways and Means Committee, the House Appropriations and Finance Committee and the House Taxation and Revenue Committee. The chief clerks are responsible for preparing and issuing all other bill analyses.

Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Room 416 of the State Capitol Building.

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Conflicts with House Bill 309, "Traffic Citations Penalty Assessment."

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department (SHTD)

Department of Finance and Administration, Local Government Division (LGD)

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court

Department of Public Safety, Office of Legal Affairs

SUMMARY

Synopsis of SFC Amendment

The Senate Finance Committee amendment clarifies where revenues from penalty assessment fees and fines are deposited. Only the penalty assessment fee shall be deposited into the local government's treasury, not "all fines and fees." The amendment also allows penalty assessments to be processed in metropolitan court in addition to municipal court.

Synopsis of Bill

Senate Bill 264 would authorize counties to establish county traffic ordinances and penalty assessment programs. The bill would require the magistrate and metropolitan court to process penalty assessments and collect all fines for deposit into the local treasury of the local government.

Significant Issues

This bill amends the statute (Section 66-8-117 and 66-8-130 NMSA 1978) to read "local government" instead of "municipality." Local governments that adopt an ordinance to establish a penalty assessment program can assess an additional ten dollars ($10.00) per penalty.

The fee must be deposited into a special fund in the local government's treasury and may only be used for the following:

• •jailer training;
• •planning, construction, operation, and maintenance of the municipal or county jail;
• •paying the costs of housing prisoners; and
• •to comply with the match or contribution requirements for the receipt of federal funds.

According to the Administrative Office of the Courts, this bill would cause 36,339 tickets that are currently state citations to be issued as county citations (based on 1997 figures). Currently, all fines from tickets go to the general fund.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

There is no appropriation contained in this bill, however, there is significant fiscal impact.

With the above amount of citations changing from state to county penalties, the general fund could lose approximately $908.5 a year. This assumes an average of $25.00 per ticket fine. The revenues from this change would transfer from the general fund to the local government's treasury.

Revenue from the Court Automation Fund and the Court Facilities Fund is pledged to pay off the bonds already issued for court automation and soon to be issued to build a Metropolitan Court building, according to the AOC. The bond legislation prohibits amending, repealing, or otherwise modifying the Court Automation Fee and Court Facilities Fee as to impair outstanding revenue bonds that may be secured by a pledge of the distributions from the two funds. The AOC indicates that the Court Automation Fund collected $363.4 from traffic citations and the Court Facilities Fee collected $405.2.

In addition, other state agencies would lose revenues generated from fees collected and deposited into various funds. The AOC indicates that the Judicial Education Center collected $36.3 from the Judicial Education Fee. Also, the Brain Injury Fund collected $181.7 and the Traffic Safety Fee Fund collected $109.0.

*All fee amounts collected are based on 1997 number of citations.

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

The Administrative Office of the Courts sites the Workload Measurement Study, which is used by the judicial branch to calculate court clerk demand. According to this study, one clerk can process approximately 1,016 traffic filings per year. As stated above, the traffic citation filings numbered 36,336, which would be added to the magistrate and metropolitan courts work load. If this impact were realized, this would required 36 additional FTE, with a $1,382.9 general fund affect for personal services and employee benefits, according to the AOC and other agencies.

The AOC also indicates an administrative cost of $180.3 for the judicial automated system for initial entry, maintenance, documentation, and training.

CONFLICT/DUPLICATION/COMPANIONSHIP/RELATIONSHIP

Conflicts with House Bill 309, "Traffic Citation Penalty Assessment," which would provide municipalities with the authority to double the amount of penalty assessments for certain violations of the motor vehicle code.

MW/njw:gm