NEW MEXICO PUBLIC DEFENDER COMMISSION FY16 BUDGET REQUEST

September 2, 2014 To: Michael Marcelli State Budget Division Director DFA State Budget Division 190 Bataan Memorial Building Santa Fe, NM 87503 and David Abbey, Director Legislative Finance Committee 325 Don Gaspar, Suite 101 Santa Fe, NM 87501 NEW MEXICO PUBLIC DEFENDER COMMISSION FY16 BUDGET REQUEST The New Mexico Public Defender Commission and the Law Offices of the Public Defender submit the following FY2016 budget request: I. Background. Since Gideon v. Wainwright recognized the constitutional right of an indigent to an attorney, the New Mexico indigent defense system was organized under the executive branch. The governor chose the Chief Public Defender and controlled the budget request for the Public Defender Department. In 2012, the people of New Mexico voted in favor of a constitutional amendment to enact an independent entity, the New Mexico Public Defender Commission (Commission), and to remove indigent defense from the executive. The Commission is now responsible for submitting to the Legislature a budget request that will adequately fund indigent defense representation throughout the State. The Commission consists of eleven volunteers, each an attorney appointed by a political entity or by the Dean of the University of New Mexico School of Law. It is made up of approximately an equal balance of Democrats and Republicans. The

Commission is charged with providing oversight to the Department, hiring a Chief Public Defender, setting standards for representation and lobbying for adequate funding. It is "independent" but has no funding of its own and is guaranteed no funding for indigent defense. The Commission has hired Chief Jorge Alvarado to manage the Law Offices of the Public Defender (LOPD) and has instituted performance standards for attorneys. It is presently addressing funding issues. II. The Commission approach to the budget request. The Commission has worked over the past year to assess funding needs for indigent defense. This submission is its first budget request, [footnote: the Commission signed on the 2015 budget at its first ever meeting, but had not participated in the preparation of the budget amounts.] A. Assessment. The Commission has met several times since its first meeting in August of 2013 to prioritize ways in which to improve the New Mexico indigent defense system. To do this, the Commission began to assess the status of indigent defense in New Mexico. It surveyed people associated with indigent defense including employees of the Department and contract lawyers. It received comments from members of the public. It compared the New Mexico system with those in surrounding states. B. Problems that affect the budget request. Commissioners found that the needs are great and that several problems appear: 1. In general indigent clients are not served as they should be. Resources are not well used and the work is often not being adequately completed. 2. There are too few attorney positions to do the work necessary to meet constitutional requirements or the Commission's Performance Standards. Attorney positions are often underpaid and are not always competitive with salaries of other agencies. 3. There is inadequate support staff for attorneys. Attorneys are often required to do work that should be done by support staff, a highly inefficient and wasteful method of conducting business. In one office, the ratio of attorneys to secretaries is seven to one, requiring the attorneys to spend time on secretarial work. 4. In addition to having too few support staff, the existing staff is underpaid and many staff members leave the Department to work for other state agencies at higher rates of pay. 5. "Contract counsel", attorneys who contract with the Department to represent clients (as opposed to lawyers who work on salary for the Department) are abysmally underpaid. Aflat rate system has been in place in New Mexico for decades. It is constitutionally inadequate. The Commission has resolved that flat fees will not be paid any further, because, as structured, they are unethical and, at best, are inappropriate. For example, a first degree felony mandating 18 years incarceration in the penitentiary for the defendant if convicted, pays the attorney a flat fee of $700.00. This is unacceptable in a case that might take two years to

prepare for trial. Meanwhile, a civil attorney being paid by the Risk Management Division will be paid as much as $160.00 per hour with no cap, amounting to tens of thousands of dollars for representing the state in a civil case. 6. The combination of underpaid contracts and overworked and underpaid attorneys and staff often leads to a "meet and plead" system where an attorney meets his client and pleads him guilty to a charge on the same day. This practice does not meet the Performance Standards and is unacceptable. 7. A conflict of interest exists when the Department funds staff attorneys and also decides the pay for contract attorneys for cases in which the Department has a conflict of interest (for example, a case in which there are two co-defendants). The structure cannot be changed by the Commission because it does not have the authority to do so. However, it urges the Legislature to create a separate agency for conflict representation. The Commission's Statement of Principles. The Commission has adopted a "Statement of Principles". In many respects these principles affect the funding that is necessary to conduct indigent defense. The full text of the Principles is: "The New Mexico Public Defender Commission establishes the following principles for conducting indigent defense: 1. The right to an attorney is a fundamental right as recognized by the United States Supreme Court and the New Mexico Constitution. An attorney in a criminal case is a necessity, not a luxury. 2. In order for the fundamental right to a lawyer to be realized, lawyer must be appointed for any client who requests an attorney and cannot afford his or her own lawyer. 3. The right to counsel of indigent persons accused of crimes in New Mexico will be protected because it will be conducted in accordance with the United States and New Mexico Constitutions and the New Mexico Rules of Professional Conduct. This legal service for indigents will be commensurate with that available to non-indigents. 4. For the benefit of clients and to satisfy constitutional requirements, the Commission has adopted Performance Standards for all aspects of attorney representation including client consultation, case investigation, legal research, motions practice, trial preparation, trial skills, sentencing and appeals. These Performance Standards will be met whether the client is represented by the Law Offices of the Public Defender, contract or conflict attorneys. 5. Representation by appointed counsel will begin at the earliest possible moment in order to protect the client's fundamental right to counsel. 6. Vertical representation, rather than horizontal representation, will be

provided in all indigent defense cases. 7. All employees and contractors of the Law Offices of the Public Defender will be paid competitively with employees and contractors of other state agencies that provide legal services. 8. The Public Defender Commission will adopt its own personnel rules governing the conduct of all LOPD employees. Such rules will provide at least the same due process protections as exist under currently applicable rules of the State Personnel Office. 9. Hourly rates, not flat fees, will be paid to contract attorneys to ensure ethical representation, maintain accountability for funding, pay fairly for work done and to provide incentive to work for the benefit of the client. 10. Reasonable costs and expenses of contract counsel will be paid separately from and in addition to hourly rate fees. 11. The Public Defender Commission will adopt a ratio of attorneys to support staff that will improve the quality of representation of clients by attorneys by optimizing the work of support staff and by using limited funds efficiently. 12. A separate division within the Public Defender Department will be maintained for the administration of conflict counsel. The Commission will urge the New Mexico Legislature to create a separate agency for representation and administration of cases in which there is a conflict of interest." D. Setting Performance Standards. As it is obligated to do by statute, the Commission set Performance Standards for the conduct of representation by attorneys. The standards may be found at the Public Defender website, www.pdd.state.nm.us. In general, they include the attorneys' obligation under the Constitution of the United States to meet with clients, investigate the case, file appropriate motions, prepare for trial and conduct appropriate negotiations. Regardless of the apparent guilt or innocence of a particular client, the performance standards must be met. E. Approach to the budget - answering the key question. In essence, the Commission is attempting to address the question, "What resources are necessary to meet the requirements of the Legislature, the Constitution, and Performance Standards set by the Commission?" The Commission's approach to answering the question is to alert the legislature to what is needed - not simply in dollars, but in necessary resources such as attorneys, support staff, administrative staff and facilities - to meet the challenge set forth by the Constitution and the Legislature. The Commission has attempted to assess the personnel necessary to meet the reasonable minimal standards. As such, there are no luxuries included in the budget request, not even raises that have gone lacking for most employees.

III. All Commissioners and the LOPD Agree on this budget request. In adopting this budget request, the Commission is unanimous. Though it is made up of attorneys of different backgrounds and different political affiliations, the Commission is of one mind concerning the needs for adequate funding of indigent defense in New Mexico. Through its assessment, the Commission has learned what it already strongly suspected, that indigent defense in New Mexico is seriously underfunded. Though the Department and the contract attorneys and staff are often talented and dedicated, they cannot possibly handle the heavy caseload caused by an increasing volume of criminal cases filed in the State. Consequently, they cannot possibly meet the Performance Standards that have been set. Additional funding is necessary for the clients and the community to receive services that are required by the Constitution and the Legislature. The Commission has unanimously adopted (a) Performance Standards, (b) its Statement of Principles, and (c) a resolution requiring the payment of hourly rates for contract attorneys. Politics do not affect these serious decisions made by the Commission. The Commission recognizes that clients must first receive constitutionally mandated representation and that to do so will aid the community. The Commission also recognizes that whatever funding is given must be used responsibly toward meeting the standards that have been set. IV. The Resulting Budget Request Because of the problems shown and because of the requirements that must be met, the Commission is submitting the enclosed budget request. This budget requests funding for the number of FTEs necessary to meet the standards as well funding for paying contract counsel on an hourly rate basis. An hourly rate method of compensating contract counsel to represent indigent defendants is consistent with systems in surrounding states. For the criminal justice system to work properly, clients must be represented by attorneys with proper qualifications, training, and support, and who have the time necessary to meet the standards set by law and by the Commission. The attorneys must be supported by paralegals, investigators, social workers, and clerical staff that are adequate in number and in qualifications in order to meet these minimal standards. The enclosed budget request attempts to satisfy those goals. V. The FY2016 Budget Request for the LOPD The FY 2016 request includes the base and a total expansion from general funds in the amount of $96,431,900.00. Our priorities are guided by the principle that providing adequate resources to "frontload" the criminal justice system helps everyone: that is, providing resources to represent clients early in the proceedings will help eliminate unnecessary proceedings. Addressing drug abuse, mental health and juvenile issues early will help save lives and resources and increase community safety; and contribute to an efficient and strong administration of justice. Without the proper resources, cases take too long to reach a final resolution. Delays create unnecessary stress on

everyone in the criminal justice system, including our clients, the victims of crimes, their families and the attorneys and judges who carry untenable caseloads. Overly stressed staff experience higher turnover which leads to further delays and additional costs in recruitment, training and preparation. Delay causes jail overcrowding which is costly to the taxpayers. Overcrowded jails cause problems for our clients, their families and attorneys in preparing for trial, especially when clients are housed in different counties or, in some instances, different states.this continues the cycle of increasing further delays. The indigent defense system must be reformed. Both the Constitution and the taxpayers' trust demand it. Our priorities are submitted below. The Commission and the LOPD have determined that (1) the Department needs sufficient funding to ensure all offices throughout the state have the staffing and resources necessary for attorneys to meet the Performance Standards set by the Commission; (2) all staff must be paid adequately and at competitive rates to attract competent and career oriented help; and (3) Contract Attorneys must be provided the same resources available as would an attorney within the Department, and compensated at a reasonable rate. The Commission has determined that the minimum reasonable rate of compensation for all Contract Attorneys is eighty-five ($85.00) dollars per hour. VI. In accordance with the budget request instructions, we provide the following information: A. CONTRACT COUNSEL COMPENSATION: The projected costs of an hourly rate method of compensation for Contract Attorneys at $85.00 per hour is estimated at $45,726,000.00 ($33,705,500.00 in addition to the existing base). An evaluation of compensation rates for contract counsel demonstrates that the current New Mexico rate for criminal cases is strikingly inadequate. A comparison of the amounts paid by the State of New Mexico to contract counsel through the state Risk Management Division, the amounts paid by the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico to assigned counsel in criminal cases, and amounts currently paid to contract attorneys in criminal matters based upon the existing base budget is quite revealing: 1. The State of New Mexico Risk Management Division rate of compensation for contract counsel to represent the State of New Mexico in civil cases when property or money is at stake is: i. $90.00 per hour for an attorney with 0-1.99 years of experience; ii. $110.00 per hour for an attorney with 2-4.99 years of experience; iii. $130.00 per hour for an attorney with 5-9.99 years of experience; and iv. $160.00 per hour for an attorney with 10+ years of experience; v. Assigned counsel for Risk Management can bill for legal assistants/paralegal/law clerk assistance on the following basis: a. For law clerks in second or third year of an ABA accredited law

school up to $60.00 per hour; b. F o r p a r a l e g a l s 1 Those who meet the requirements of NM Supreme Court Rule 20-102 may bill up to $50.00 per hour; 2. Those who meet the requirements of the National Association of Legal Assistants may bill up to $60.00 per hour; 3. For those where neither a or b apply but have five (5) years of experience up to $40.00 per hour and if only have three (3) years of experience up to $35.00 per hour. 2. The United States District Court for the District of New Mexico compensation for appointed counsel in criminal matters is at a rate of $125.00 per hour. The federal court further compensates all expenses, including telephone calls, copying costs and mileage associated with the representation of their clients. 3. B y c o m p a r i s o n, t h e c u r r e n t P u b l i c D e f e n d e r r a t e o f compensation for contract counsel when a human being's liberty is at stake are flat rates as follows: $700.00 for first degree felonies where mandatory prison sentence is eighteen (18) years; $650.00 for second degree felonies where mandatory prison sentence is nine (9) years; $595.00 for third degree felonies where mandatory prison sentence is three (3) years; iv. $540.00 for a fourth degree felony where the prison exposure is eighteen (18) months; v. $180.00 for misdemeanor cases with an additional sum of $100.00 if the case goes to trial in Magistrate or Metropolitan Courts; and vi. $250.00 for Juvenile cases. These comparisons starkly demonstrate that contract counsel defense services are seriously underfunded. In an effort to remedy this serious problem, the Commission has established an hourly rate of compensation for Contract Counsel to ensure that counsel will provide the services guaranteed by the constitution; ensure a level of accountability in the provision of services; protect citizens; improve the efficient administration of justice; and save money.

Note: The Commission is presently implementing a pilot project under the present (2015) budget applying the hourly rate approach in certain counties that are in crisis. This is in order to serve clients in immediate need and to retrieve data to help in the implementation of the hourly rate format that will be in use statewide during the next year. The per-case rate schedule has largely been unchanged since the 1960s. Very few things, whether food or durable goods, cost the same today as they did then. Even a 3% cost of living adjustment would amount to a 226% growth. Adjusting for inflation, the growth would have been a 584.88% increase so that $400.00 in 1968 is the equivalent of $2739.51 in 2014. Given the volume at which Contract Counsel are handling cases under the flat fee schedule, clients are not being seen by their attorneys, attorneys meet clients in court for the first time, cases are unnecessarily delayed in order to allow the attorney to talk to the client, many clients unnecessarily spend lengthy stays in custody, and the quality of representation is sometimes substandard. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is not being met. This results in wrongful convictions in some i n s t a n c e s. C o m p l a i n t s a b o u t c o n t r a c t a t t o r n e y s a r e received daily by the administration. When clients challenge the legality of their convictions, new attorneys will require investigation and possible litigation. With more litigation, court congestion continues to increase causing even more delays. There are many examples in other states where lawsuits have challenged the lack of adequate funding for indigent defense where the system encourages a "meet and plead" approach to representation. In that case, the promise of Gideon is violated and courts have ordered injunctive relief, and in some instances, the United States Department of Justice has intervened. The projected cost of changing to an hourly rate method of compensation is premised on reasonable assumptions regarding the number of cases represented by contract counsel and the number of hours required to provide the services essential for effective assistance of counsel. (Chart attached as Appendix X). The "marker" amounts are calculated based on a low hourly rate of $85. The projected budget assumes that approximately 95% of the cases will be resolved without proceeding to trial and, conversely, that 5% of the cases will be resolved by a trial and thus attain the full trial marker amount. This premise is based on the national average of cases resolved by trials in criminal cases. Using a bell curve, the request projects that 25% of cases will settle without a trial costing 25% of the marker amount; 50% of cases will settle without a trial costing 50% of the marker amount; and 20% of cases will settle without a trial at 100% of the marker amount. These projections are applied to the total number of cases represented by contract counsel and consider the different classes of cases assigned to them. This methodology

allows for variance between cases that resolve quickly and easily and complex cases which require full trial preparation but settle on the eve of trial. 9. In order to properly administer an accurate and accountable program that compensates Contract Counsel at eighty-five ($85.00) dollars per hour, five (5) additional staff are necessary. This entails two (2) additional senior attorneys, one (1) paralegal, and two (2) clerical/division administrative support. B. ADEQUATE STAFFING LEVELS: The projected cost for expansion of two hundred and nine (209) additional full time permanent team members is $14,423,900.00. The purpose of this request is to rebuild the support staff positions necessary to increase the efficiency of staff lawyers and to continue increasing the staffing of attorneys as recommended by the New Mexico Sentencing Commission. In prior years, the LOPD was inadequately staffed and funded to provide proper indigent defense. At the same time caseloads grew and, with them, workloads increased. An increased need for services arises due to many factors beyond the control of the Commission or the LOPD. Caseloads increase due to arrests and prosecutions. With each new criminal law or penalty, additional police officer, additional prosecutor or additional judge the burden on the defense is increased. In the case of LOPD, to keep up with the increased demand and recognizing the need to have attorneys represent the clients, several vacant support positions over the years have been reclassified to attorney positions. 1. Support Staff (Non-attorney) This expansion request includes funding for an additional one hundred and seventy six (176) support staff: fifty-five (55) investigators, fiftythree (53) paralegals, fifty-three (53) clerical support and fifteen (15) social workers. These additions will provide adequate staffing based on reasonable ratios of staff to attorney. Adequate support staff provides appropriate assistance in the preparation, coordination and development of the case for which the attorney is responsible. When adequate resources provide appropriate support, attorneys can focus on the legal work required by the Performance Standards such as meeting with clients, timely developing the case, researching legal issues, attending court appearances and where appropriate, conducting timely litigation. With proper support staff lawyers become more efficient and professional in handling their caseloads. Timely preparation helps resolve cases which reduces delays and saves money. Likewise, the work of social workers ensures that appropriate services are delivered to clients thus helping to avoid unnecessary costly incarceration in favor of less costly alternatives such as appropriate mental health treatment. 2. Attorney Staff This request includes funding for an additional thirty-three (33) attorneys state-wide. The Legislatively created New Mexico Sentencing

Commission has studied the workloads of members of the criminal justice system. Every year the Sentencing Commission provides an estimate on the appropriate level of public defenders needed to provide adequate indigent defense in New Mexico. According to the 2014 recommendation from the Sentencing Commission, the LOPD requires an additional seventy (70) attorneys statewide in order to ensure the adequate level of representation is afforded to the citizens of New Mexico. This request is only requesting thirty-five (35) additional attorneys, thirty-three (33) of whom will be providing direct services to clients, based on the assumption that these additional attorneys will have the staff support required to be more efficient. Justification for additional attorney and support staff: The adequate level of attorney and support staff will provide the timely handling of cases without unnecessary delays and thereby save money. Adequate staff support for attorney ratio is based on the exiting ratio for the AODA and District Attorneys statewide. Below is a chart to demonstrate the comparative analysis of existing LOPD staffing ratios with that of the District Attomeys/AODA. Comparison of Staff Levels and Staff to Attorney Ratios between the Department and the District Attorneys/AODA LOPD (Current) Attorneys* 221 254 Investigators** 19(1:12) Paralegals/Specialists Social Workers/ Victim Advocates 33(1:6) 17(1:14) LOPd(FY2016 (Request) 78(1:3.6) 84(1:3) 28(1:9) Current FY 2015 Staffing for District Attorneys/AODA 346 55(1:6) 112(1:3) 69(1:5) A d m i n / O t h e r 4 3 ( 1 : 6 ) 55(1:4.6) 100(1:3.5) Clerical 73(1:3) 128(1-2) 301 (1.1.1) * The current number of attorneys does not include five administrative positions that require law degrees (Chief Public Defender, 2 Deputy Chiefs, the Contract Counsel Director, and the Training Director). ** The FY2016 request is for 221 new positions, including 33 attorneys plus 2 additional administrative attorneys for Contract Counsel Litigation Services. The following reflects the appropriate distribution of additional staff in w

light of LOPD needs: 1. CRITICAL EXPANSION NEEDS: 79 a. 23 investigators statewide b. 20 paralegals statewide. c. 22 legal secretaries statewide d. 5 social workers e. 2 attorneys (1 attorney in Taos office and 1 attorney in Carlsbad) f. expand juvenile support i. 2 paralegals ii. 2 investigators iii. 3 clerical support 2. IMMEDIATE EXPANSION NEEDS 69 a. 10 attorneys b. 5 social workers c. 17 paralegals d. 21 investigators e. 16 clerical support 3. ESSENTIAL PRIORITIES: 50 a. 14 attorneys b. 12 paralegals c. 8 investigators d. 5 social workers e. 11 clerical support C. STATE-WIDE JUVENILE DEFENSE UNIT: Representation for juvenile offenders is provided by the LOPD in the First, Second and Third Judicial District offices which have dedicated staff attorneys designated for the provision of services to the juvenile offender. However, in the remaining districts representation for juvenile offenders is provided through attorneys who also provide representation in adult misdemeanor and felony cases. This request is to create a state-wide Juvenile Defense Unit (hereinafter referred to as JDU) to ensure a consistent level of service to those juveniles accused of the most serious charges with the greatest likelihood of commitment to a detention facility. This request includes five (5) attorneys (1 managing attorney and 4 senior attorneys), one (1) investigator, one (1) paralegal, one (1) social worker //

and one (1) administrator/clerical support. 1. The LOPD has state-wide units in order to standardize the level of representation for certain groups of clients in a consistent manner with dedicated staff. The units include the Mental Health (MHU) and the Capital Crimes (CCU) units. These units provide representation in cases no matter where in the state the case may be located. The CCU may represent juvenile clients accused of homicide cases. For all other crimes, juvenile clients are assigned to either the local office or the contract counsel. 2. Representation of juvenile offenders is nationally recognized as an increasingly specialized field. An adequate level of representation of juveniles charged with crimes can make the difference in a child's life. With meaningful representation through the juvenile justice system, the outcome can reduce recidivism, resulting in no further contact with law enforcement into adulthood.representation of juvenile offenders is nationally recognized as an increasingly specialized field. An adequate level of representation of juveniles charged with crimes can make the difference in a child's life. With meaningful representation through the juvenile justice system, the outcome can reduce recidivism, resulting in no further contact with law enforcement into adulthood. 3. The LOPD proposes a state-wide JDU to represent juveniles accused of the most serious crimes which are apart from those not represented by the CCU. The JDU will allow for a standard level of representation guaranteeing juvenile clients with counsel who are dedicated, learned and experienced in representation of juvenile offenders. 4. The Anne E. Casey Foundation's Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative (JDAI) has been in place in Bernalillo County with great success. The JDU staff will be able to work with representatives from the NM Supreme Court, District Attorneys, District Court Judges and CYFD Juvenile Justice Division to implement the state-wide use of JDAI principles. 5. In Fiscal Year 2013, Bernalillo County incarcerated 63 children. With a population of 673,000, that averages to an approximate commitment rate of one child for every 10,000 people. In Chavez County where there were 18 commitments and a population of 65,000 people, there was an average of one commitment for every 3.5 thousand people. Lea County incarcerates one child for every 4.5 thousand. The reason for the disparity can be attributed to a number of things - one factor is that in Bernalillo County the LOPD has a dedicated juvenile unit where attorneys specialize in juvenile defense and where a social worker is dedicated to assisting in obtaining treatment and creating treatment plans. A state-wide Juvenile Defense Unit should be able to reduce the number of juvenile commitments throughout the state. D. METROPOLITAN COURT VERTICAL REPRESENTATION: Vertical 12

representation is necessary to meet constitutional requirements and to meet the Performance Standards adopted by the Commission. The Budget Request for FY2015 included a request for six (6) attorneys for the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court Unit in order to convert the nature of the representation from horizontal to vertical. The legislature approved four (4) of these requested attorneys for the current fiscal year. This request for the remaining two (2) attorneys is to bring the level of staffing to that necessary to ensure vertical representation in all misdemeanor cases in Metropolitan Court. EXPANSION STAFF FOR ADMINISTRATION OF HUMAN RESOURCES, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND FISCAL OVERSIGHT: The projected costs for additional staff in all three units is an additional seven (7) staff members for $490,500.00. This request is based on the need for additional staff to administer a personnel system independent of State Personnel Office (SPO), Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) and Department of Information Technology (DolT). In 2012,, the citizens of the State of New Mexico amended the New Mexico Constitution to create a public defender department as an independent agency, moving the LOPD from the Executive Branch to an independent Commission, the Judicial Branch. In addition, the Commission is developing independent personnel rules pursuant to the provisions of the Public Defender Act as amended in 2014 to declare the LOPD exempt from the SPO. Consequently, with this change in structure under the New Mexico Constitution, much many of the duties previously handled by SPO, DFA and DolT, will now be the responsibility of the LOPD to administer. These extra duties include: 1. FISCAL DIVISION: With the addition of extra duties previously administered by DFA, two (2) additional staff members are needed; 2. HUMAN RESOURCES: With the implementation of the independent personnel policies three (3) additional staff members are needed to properly administer the provisions of the policies which were previously administered by SPO; and 3. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: With the implementation of an independent network, telephone and e-mail system for the LOPD, two (2) additional staff member is needed to properly administer the network. ADEQUATE COMPENSATION: Projected costs to adequately compensate existing staff are $565,900.00. This request is based on the need to retain existing qualified non-attorney staff by increasing compensation levels to the mid-point of current pay bands. Compensation for nearly 200 staff members is below the mid-point of the current pay bands or not at a level which is competitive or conducive to retention of professionals. Many have been loyal members of the LOPD family. Other than statutory pay increases given to all state classified employees, LOPD staff members have not received an increase in compensation for long periods. The ability to provide in-band pay increases to staff has been exceptionally limited and highly restrictive. Consequently, there has been much resentment among many staff. In many instances, in-pay band increases have been denied for highly qualified and well-deserving employees 13

while newly hired employees with similar experience are compensated at a higher rate. And in some instances, the loyal employee is required to provide guidance, training and oversight of these new hires. In a few instances, the new hire's supervisor is making nearly the same amount as the new employee. In these instances, some employees have come to the realization that perhaps the only way they can receive adequate compensation is to resign from the LOPD for better compensation elsewhere. When we have turn-over, more costs are incurred in recruiting and training new staff, with the concomitant reduction in productivity. With staff turn-over and lost productivity, unnecessary delays occurs which in turn costs more money. There is a need to focus on retention of existing staff through adequate compensation. This request will help close the gap and take a step in the right direction towards developing a career oriented public law firm. G. CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: The current case management system (CDMS) will need to be replaced with a system that is integrated with the statewide Odyssey system successfully implemented by the Administrative Office of the Courts. This integration is important to help minimize input errors in dockets and to ensure uniform calendaring for attorneys. This integration will increase efficiency by eliminating the need for LOPD attorneys and staff to check two different systems (CDMS and Odyssey) for information about cases. Furthermore, an integrated system will allow for immediate document transfer once Odyssey begins to include full texts of pleadings in criminal cases. This request includes $100,000 for consulting to begin the design process for a new system. H. STATE-WIDE TRAINING FOR ALL STAFF: this request includes an increase from base for an additional one-hundred thousand ($100,000) dollars in order to ensure appropriate training for all staff. 1. Lawyer training is imperative for the development of attorneys who can provide the appropriate skills in the representation of clients; 2. New developments in the law and science associated with representation of clients accused of crimes require continued training to maintain the skill set required in a professional defense; 3. Lawyers are required to maintain annual minimum Continuing Legal Education credits; 4. An adequate training division should ensure the proper professional development of all staff; 5. Support staff (clerical, investigators, social workers, Information Technology, fiscal and Human Resources) will need to improve their skills and remain current on developments in their fields in order to meet the demands of increased technology; 6. Social workers are required to maintain their annual Continuing Education Units; 7. Paralegals must obtain training and are required to maintain minimum 14

annual credits; and 8. Consultants and experts in different fields will be retained to provide training on the latest developments. Thank you for your consideration of this information. Please contact us with any questions or comments. Michael I:. Stout.NDhair The New Mexico Public Defender Commission Jorge Alvarado, Chief Public Defender Law Offices of the Public Defender 15