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 Griego
DATE TYPED 3/10/05
HB
SHORT TITLE Soil and Water Commission Watershed Coordinator SB 690/aSCONC
ANALYST Aguilar
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation Contained Estimated Additional Impact Recurring
or Non-Rec
Fund
Affected
FY05
FY06
FY05
FY06
$60.0 Recurring General Fund
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Duplicates HB 661
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
LFC Files
Responses Received From
New Mexico Finance Authority (NMFA)
Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD)
Office of the State Engineer (OSE)
New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of SCONC Amendment
The Senate Conservation Committee amendment to Senate Bill 690 changes the scope of a re-
sponsibility to be assigned to the watershed coordinator from the use of to coordination with
the range improvement task force.
Synopsis of Bill
Senate Bill 690 provides for the Soil and Water Conservation Commission to establish a position
for and appoint a watershed coordinator whose duties would include: establishing cooperative
agreements between government agencies; coordinating landowner agreements; establishing a
clearinghouse for statewide watershed information in cooperation with the Water Resources Re-
search Institute; using the range improvement task force as the technical advisory group for wa-
tershed projects; increasing watershed education programs through the cooperative extension
service and soil and water conservation districts; expanding opportunities for biomass use and
pg_0002
Senate Bill 690/aSCONC -- Page 2
development and continue expansion of job development for watershed restoration projects.
Significant Issues
As demand for water increases, the limited supply of water will necessitate improved methods of
husbanding those supplies. Watershed improvement is one proposed method to better salvage
and harvest water. Evaluations of the benefits from watershed improvements, though touted by
many, are difficult to substantiate. The latest scientific evaluations of watershed improvement
projects indicate that water salvage is usually much less than anticipated, especially in the long
term. To ensure maximum benefit from expended funds, the legislature may wish to consider
subjecting watershed improvement projects to rigorous scientific planning, review, and evalua-
tion.
Section 9-5A-10 NMSA 1978 directs the Secretary of the Energy, Minerals and Natural Re-
sources Department (EMNRD) to develop a comprehensive watershed restoration strategy that
sets guidelines for coordination with state and federal land management agencies and political
subdivisions, including the soil and water conservation districts and other stakeholders. As a re-
sult of this legislation, the responsibility for convening and stewarding the Forest and Watershed
Health planning process was assigned to the State Forestry Division of EMNRD.
The Forestry Division notes a statewide committee was organized to collaboratively develop the
plan. The New Forest and Watershed Health Planning Committee was comprised of representa-
tives from a wide variety of governmental agencies (including the Soil and Water Conservation
Commission and the New Mexico Association of Conservation Districts, citizen stakeholders
and other experts involved in ecological restoration efforts across New Mexico. This planning
effort represents an unprecedented collaboration among these diverse representatives, and the
Forest and Watershed Health Plan has the full endorsement of the planning committee.
The Forestry Division further notes planning committee sessions resulted in the establishment of
a consensus vision, guiding principles and specific recommendations to address the identified
needs, which the public reviewed at town hall meetings around the state during the summer of
2004. The Plan has been sent to the governor’s office for signature.
Efforts are currently underway to create a statewide office of watershed management that would
coordinate the activities of all agencies involved in watershed protection, including the Environ-
ment Department; Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department; as well as the agencies
listed in SB 690. The office of watershed management would have a broad and holistic mandate
to improve watershed health, including range management, forest health initiatives, water quality
improvement, etc. The planning discussions for this new office are a collaborative effort sup-
ported by the governor.
PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS
At present the Soil and Water Conservation Commission has not established performance meas-
ures regarding the expenditure of funds for watershed health activities. The LFC in the interim
noted issues related to the lack of performance accountability with regard to water related expen-
ditures.
pg_0003
Senate Bill 690/aSCONC -- Page 3
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
This bill directs the hiring of personnel yet does not provide a recurring appropriation to cover
the costs of the position. It is estimated the cost of this employee would be approximately $60
thousand including benefits. Other costs associated with this position are not included in the es-
timate.
TECHNICAL ISSUES
A number of executive agencies as well as those specified in SB 690 have significant watershed
oversight responsibilities. The legislature may wish to consider this position within the proposed
office of water shed management and locate it within an executive agency.
The responsibility of the watershed coordinator to enter into cooperative agreements with federal
agencies appears to conflict with existing law as provided in Section 68-2-6 NMSA 1978 which
names the Forestry Division as the agent of the State to enter into agreements with federal and
other agencies for forest conservation purposes.
A number of executive agencies as well as those specified in this bill have significant watershed
responsibilities. It is not clear whether as provided for in HB 690, the soil and water conserva-
tion commission or its appointee is the appropriate governmental entity to supervise cooperative
agreements between the state and federal agencies, political subdivisions or particularly Indian
nations, tribes or pueblos. This interaction on the surface appears to be the function of the ex-
ecutive branch predominantly in government to government interaction with Indian entities. The
legislature may wish to consider this position within the proposed office of watershed manage-
ment within an executive agency.
PA/yr