Judicial Compensation Commission votes to re-submit pay and pension proposals after governor pocket-veto

The Judicial Compensation Commission voted unanimously to forward the same pay and retirement recommendations it sent last year to the New Mexico Legislature, after the governor declined to sign two pension bills that passed both chambers, commissioners said at the meeting.

The commission’s director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, Carl Ryfstek, told commissioners that last year’s legislative outcome was “a mixed bag,” and that while judges received a 4% cost-of-living increase, pension-solvency measures the commission supported were pocket-vetoed by the governor. “The good news is that pay for the justices and judges continues to be very, very competitive,” Ryfstek said, noting the 4% increase raised associate justice pay to “approximately $249,000 per year” and district court judges to “$244,900 a year.”

Why it matters: Commissioners said pension solvency and compensation affect judicial recruitment and retention. Ryfstek and other commissioners described the pension bills — House Bill 182 for JRA (the retirement plan covering Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, district and metropolitan judges) and House Bill 183 for MRA (magistrate judges) — as measures intended to improve long-term fund solvency without new general-fund spending. Both bills passed the House and Senate (the MRA bill had five no votes in the House; the JRA bill passed unanimously in the House), Ryfstek said, but “the governor did not sign either bill and they were effectively pocket vetoed.”

Commission discussion focused on why the bills were not signed. Ryfstek said the judicial branch did not receive a clear explanation from the governor’s office: “We did not really get any kind of clear messaging back on this, and it remains a little bit of a puzzle,” he said. He added that the commission’s pension proposals would have increased judges’ contributions and imposed small additional costs on courts rather than seeking new general-fund dollars.

On a motion from Commissioner Damon Eli, seconded by Commissioner Pat Ortiz, the commission voted to re-submit the same recommendations it endorsed in last year’s report. Commissioners recorded the motion as approved unanimously. The commission asked the Administrative Office of the Courts to prepare a draft report; Ryfstek said he expects the draft largely to be “copy and paste from last year with just a few updates.” The commission set a deadline of Friday, Oct. 3, for the AOC draft and scheduled a meeting to review the draft at 1:00 p.m. on Oct. 6.

Commissioners also discussed the timeline and strategy for trying again this legislative session. Ryfstek warned that the governor sets the legislative call and that, in the shorter session this year, it is unclear whether the pension and compensation proposals would secure a place on the call even if the commission supports them. “I would be shocked if these proposals…made it onto the call,” he said, adding that the commission should continue messaging the importance of judicial retirement and compensation while reassessing strategy next year.

Votes at a glance — motion to re-submit last year’s judicial compensation and retirement recommendations: Motion passed, unanimous. Mover: Damon Eli. Second: Pat Ortiz. Tally: yes 7, no 0, abstain 0 (commissioners present voted in favor). Adam Flores explicitly recorded his vote as “Aye.”

The meeting then moved to public comment; no members of the public registered to speak. The commission adjourned after confirming the Oct. 3 draft deadline and the Oct. 6, 1:00 p.m. review meeting.