This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The Governor of New Mexico implemented a policy reducing monthly allotments of funds appropriated to state agencies by 2.5% to maintain general fund reserves and prepare for potential legislative appropriation reductions. Several district attorneys and other petitioners challenged this policy, arguing it infringed on the legislature's exclusive power to appropriate funds and violated constitutional separation-of-powers principles (paras 1, 11).
Procedural History
- [Not applicable or not found]
Parties' Submissions
- Petitioners: Argued that the Governor's policy of reducing allotments violated the legislature's exclusive authority to appropriate funds and lacked statutory or constitutional authorization. They contended that the Governor's actions improperly interfered with legislative intent and forced agencies to make policy decisions about appropriations without guidance (paras 1, 21).
- Respondents (Governor and officials): Asserted that the Governor had statutory authority under NMSA 1978, Section 6-3-6, to regulate periodic allotments and that the reductions were a temporary measure to maintain fiscal prudence and prepare for potential legislative action. They argued the policy did not infringe on legislative powers as agencies could still request additional funds if needed (paras 9-11).
- Intervenors (State Corporation Commission and Senator Robinson): Supported the Petitioners, arguing that the Governor's policy forced agencies to make policy decisions about appropriations, violating constitutional principles and legislative intent (para 21).
Legal Issues
- Did the Governor have statutory authority to reduce allotments of appropriated funds based on fiscal policy considerations?
- Did the Governor's actions violate the constitutional principle of separation of powers by infringing on the legislature's exclusive authority to appropriate funds?
Disposition
- The Supreme Court of New Mexico granted the writ of mandamus sought by the Petitioners, ordering the Governor to resume monthly one-twelfth allotments and restore withheld funds (para 22).
Reasons
Per Ransom J. (Baca C.J., Franchini, Frost, and Minzner JJ. concurring):
- The Court held that the Governor's authority under NMSA 1978, Section 6-3-6, to regulate "periodic allotments" did not include discretion to reduce allotments based on executive fiscal policy. The statute lacked sufficient legislative standards to authorize such reductions, making the Governor's actions unconstitutional (paras 12-14, 21).
- The Court emphasized that the legislature has exclusive authority to appropriate funds and that any delegation of this power must include clear standards to guide the executive's discretion. The Governor's policy, based on anticipated legislative reductions, was not tied to the existing legislative choice of purpose and violated separation-of-powers principles (paras 3, 14, 22).
- The Court relied on precedent, including State ex rel. Holmes v. State Bd. of Fin. and decisions from other jurisdictions, to conclude that the Governor's actions exceeded his statutory and constitutional authority (paras 3-6, 15-20).
- The Court rejected the Governor's argument that the policy was temporary and did not infringe on legislative powers, noting that the reductions forced agencies to make policy decisions without legislative guidance, further undermining legislative intent (paras 7, 21).