Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Cadena
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 2/25/25
SHORT TITLE Rules Definitions for Corrections
BILL
NUMBER House Bill 428
ANALYST Sanchez
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
NMCD
No fiscal
impact
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Recurring General Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Department of Public Safety (DPS) Corrections Department (NMCD) Office of the Attorney General (NMAG)
Agency Analysis was Solicited but Not Received From
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of House Bill 428
House Bill 428 (HB428) seeks to amend several sections of the NMSA 1978 concerning
rulemaking authority, particularly in relation to the management and release of inmates,
probationers, and parolees under the supervision of the Corrections Department (NMCD).
Specifically, the bill amends Section 12-8-2 NMSA 1978 (Administrative Procedures Act) to
clarify the definition of "rule" and ensure that rules governing the release of inmates are subject
to the same procedural requirements as other agency rulemaking. Additionally, it amends Section
14-4-2 NMSA 1978 of the State Rules Act, redefining the term "rule" to include those related to
the confinement, discipline, or release of individuals under state correctional supervision. The
bill further amends Section 33-2-1 NMSA 1978, requiring NMCD to provide at least forty-five
days for public comment before adopting, amending, or repealing any rules affecting inmates,
probationers, or parolees. It also mandates that notices of such rule changes be published in
newspapers or professional publications to ensure public awareness.
The effective date of this bill is July 1, 2025.
House Bill 428 – Page 2
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
HB428 may result in increased administrative costs for NMCD due to new requirements for
formal rulemaking procedures. The bill mandates a 45-day public comment period and public
notice obligations before the department may adopt, amend, or repeal rules concerning inmates,
probationers, and parolees. Compliance with these requirements could require additional staff
time and resources, potentially impacting the department’s operational budget on a recurring
basis. While the exact fiscal impact has not been quantified, the department notes that funds
currently allocated to rehabilitation programs, facility improvements, or staff development may
need to be redirected to support the rulemaking process.
The bill could also affect the department’s ability to respond quickly to emerging security
threats, inmate management issues, or operational challenges. The additional procedural steps
may delay the implementation of new policies, which could have implications for facility
operations.
Other agencies, including the Department of Public Safety and the Office of the Attorney
General (NMAG), have indicated that the bill is not expected to have a fiscal impact on their
operations.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
HB428 would subject NMCD's rulemaking to the requirements of Section 12-8-4(A) NMSA
1978 (Administrative Procedures Act) and Section 14-4-5.2 NMSA 1978 (State Rules Act),
removing existing exemptions for rules related to the confinement, discipline, and release of
inmates, probationers, and parolees. By requiring a public comment period and notice of
proposed rule changes, the bill increases transparency and public participation in the rulemaking
process.
The bill’s provisions could introduce procedural challenges for NMCD. Some department
policies govern security protocols, facility management, and inmate conduct, which could raise
concerns about making certain internal procedures subject to public review. The extent to which
existing policies would need to be revised or formally readopted under the bill is unclear, which
could have implications for the department’s ongoing operations.
PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS
Requiring NMCD to adopt a formal rulemaking process for policies governing inmates,
probationers, and parolees could affect the department’s ability to implement operational
changes efficiently. The bill’s requirements could also shift departmental focus toward
regulatory compliance, potentially diverting staff time and resources from other core functions,
including inmate supervision, rehabilitation programming, and facility oversight.
Additionally, implementing a public comment process may require staff to review, summarize,
and respond to stakeholder input, adding to administrative workload and potentially extending
the timeline for finalizing critical policies. The extent of these performance impacts will depend
on how frequently the department must modify or adopt rules under the new framework and
whether additional staff or resources are allocated to support compliance. House Bill 428 – Page 3
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
Implementing HB428 would require NMCD to establish internal processes for managing the
formal rulemaking requirements outlined in the bill. This includes coordinating legal reviews,
compiling public comments, and ensuring compliance with procedural requirements under the
Administrative Procedures Act and the State Rules Act. The department may need to develop
tracking systems for rule changes and designate personnel to oversee rule development,
publication, and stakeholder engagement.
The department would need to establish consistent procedures for coordinating with external
publications and tracking compliance with public notification requirements, which could require
additional administrative oversight. Additionally, if existing internal policies must be re-adopted
through the formal rulemaking process, the department may experience a temporary increase in
administrative workload as it works to align current practices with the new regulatory
framework. The long-term impact on administrative functions will depend on the frequency of
rule changes and whether additional resources are allocated to support these new responsibilities.
TECHNICAL ISSUES
The New Mexico Attorney General notes a technical issue regarding the bill’s notice
requirements. While HB428 mandates a 45-day public comment period before NMCD may
adopt, amend, or repeal rules, it does not specify when the required notice must be published.
Existing law under Section 12-8-4(A), NMSA 1978 (Administrative Procedures Act), and
Section 14-4-5.2 NMSA 1978 (State Rules Act) require a 30-day notice period, which could
create inconsistencies in the timing of public notice and comment deadlines.
OTHER SUBSTANT IVE ISSUES
The expanded rulemaking authority granted to NMCD under HB428 could result in overlapping
or conflicting regulations with the Parole Board, which has separate statutory authority to adopt
rules under Section 31-21-25, NMSA 1978. The extent of this potential conflict is unclear and
may require clarification
NMCD’s analysis questioned whether existing policies and procedures not previously subject to
formal rulemaking would become void upon the bill’s effective date. If these policies must be re-
adopted through the new rulemaking process, the department could face a significant
administrative burden.
SS/rl/SL2