Sentencing Commission seeks more staff and $5 million for crime-reduction grants as lawmakers press for clearer evaluation

The New Mexico Sentencing Commission asked a House appropriations subcommittee for two additional full-time positions — including a staff attorney and a grants administrator — and renewed its request for up to $5 million in crime-reduction grant funding, the commission’s acting director told lawmakers.

"We love what we do," Douglas Carver, acting director of the New Mexico Sentencing Commission, said during the Feb. (time not specified) hearing, arguing the commission’s small staff cannot keep up with duties added since 2019. "Part of that is we are so small...we've had a desperate need for a staff attorney for a long time."

The ask comes amid competing budget recommendations. Scott Sanchez, the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) analyst, said the LFC recommendation holds general fund revenue flat versus the executive branch budget, which would add new FTEs and pay increases. Carver said the commission has managed crime-reduction grants since the Scribe Reduction Grant Act passed in 2019 and later amendments created the Crime Reduction Grant Act and a Crime Reduction Grant Act Fund, but revenue to run the program has largely come through special appropriations.

Why it matters: The grants channel state money to local Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils (CJCCs) and to nonprofits working on diversion, treatment and other programs. The LFC and DFA said the program has broadened demand and that some grant uses — such as recurring recruitment or retention salaries — do not always align with the grant law’s intent and are harder to evaluate for crime-reduction impact.

Carver told the committee the commission now receives many more applications than in early rounds and has awarded roughly 100 grants since 2019, from small equipment purchases to six-figure programs such as a gun-violence initiative in Bernalillo County. He said the commission sometimes acts as a pass-through for seed funding to help start local specialty courts and other initiatives.

LFC analyst Scott Sanchez and DFA analyst SJ Jessup pushed for clearer evaluation. "The issue is ... the lack of rigorous performance evaluation," Sanchez said, adding that some purposes in the statute, such as recruitment and retention, are not easily measurable for crime reduction. The LFC recommendation favors a smaller, more targeted pool overseen with stronger outcome metrics.

Commission CFO Amanda Armstrong told the committee that the commission’s visible cash balances consist primarily of grant funds in fund balance and that many grants are reimbursements that require carryover and multi-year accounting: "Those monies are grants, funds that we've been given that are in fund balance," Armstrong said.

Carver also updated lawmakers on the commission’s long-running project to rewrite the state's felony sentencing structure. He said the commission produced a framework for a new felony sentencing structure and presented it to legislative leadership and Senate Judiciary, but the project did not move to a bill during the last session; he said he hopes to revive the effort.

Discussion vs. direction vs. decision: Lawmakers asked for more precise accounting and stronger evaluation metrics. LFC staff urged the commission to tailor grants toward clearly evaluable, innovative interventions rather than recurring operational costs. No new statutory changes were adopted at the hearing.

Votes at the hearing: The subcommittee moved the LFC recommendation on the commission’s budget. The motion was seconded by Ranking Member Chatfield; Representative Pettigrew objected on the record. The committee proceeded to the next agenda item following the objection.

Carver invited lawmakers to raise specific policy ideas with the commission, noting its 27-member membership includes prosecutors, public defenders, corrections and victim advocates and that the body will take questions and proposals back to its committees.

Ending: The subcommittee recorded the discussion and the LFC recommendation motion. Staff and analysts agreed to follow up on grant-evaluation plans and on clarifying the Crime Reduction Grant Act fund and appropriations.