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

Campos

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

2/12/07

2/23/07

HB

SHORT TITLE

4

th

Judicial District Security Staffing

SB 968/aSJC

ANALYST C. Sanchez

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY07

FY08

Recurring

General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT (dollars in thousands)

FY07

FY08

FY09 3 Year

Total Cost

Recurring

or Non-

Rec

Fund

Affected

Total

$50.4

$50.4

$100.8 Recurring General

Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of SJC Amendment

The Senate Judiciary Amendment for Senate Bill 968 removes the appropriation for the

Administrative Office of the Courts and instead appropriates it to the Fourth Judicial District

Court.

Synopsis of Original Bill

Senate Bill 968 provides for an appropriation of $50,400 from the general fund to the

administrative office of the courts for expenditure by the fourth judicial district in FY08 to

Senate Bill 968/aSJC – Page

2

expand its security staffing to include more security officers and bailiffs. Any expended or

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

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The appropriation should go to the fourth judicial district court, not the administrative office of

the courts.

This appropriation request is part of the judiciary’s unified budget. The fourth judicial district

will apply $23,000 from its existing budget to cover the cost ($73,400) of these positions. The

$50,400 represents the balance needed to fund these positions. Total recurring costs would be

$50,400.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

The fourth judicial district court identified a security officer and bailiff as being critical to the

efficient operation of the court. These two positions are part of the judiciary’s unified budget.

The Court Staff Study completed in 2004 by the National Center for State Courts reflects the

total staffing needs of courts statewide. The staff study shows the fourth judicial district court

has a staffing percentage of 92.26% and needs 2.00 new positions.

The classification committee within the judiciary will consider approving the newly created

security-bailiff classification at its next meeting. The security-bailiff classification gives the

courts the ability to hire one person who can serve the dual role of bailiff and court security

officer. Thus, the fourth judicial district court would like the flexibility to hire a court security

officer, bailiff or security-bailiff.

PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS

The district court is participating in performance-based budgeting. Staff changes should improve

the approved output performance measures of the court.

TECHNICAL ISSUES

Line 19 of the bill should read as follows: security staffing to include more security officers or

bailiffs.

Senate Bill 968 should be amended so the appropriation goes to the fourth judicial district court,

not the administrative office of the courts.

OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

The House Appropriation and Finance Committee is strongly considering funding both positions

in House Bill 2.

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL

Status Quo

CS/csd