Facilities Program Timeline

The 2023 Budget Act (FY 2023–24) included a capital-outlay total of $153,688,000 for the following:

• Signage for the Merced Courthouse as the Charles James Ogletree, Jr. Courthouse. 
• Performance Criteria for a new District Court of Appeals in Sunnyvale.  
• Design-Build funds for the New Fort Ord Courthouse in Monterrey. 
• Revision of $25M in acquisition funds for the New Fort Ord Courthouse.
• Acquisition funds for the New Nevada City Courthouse.
• Construction funds for the addition of two courtrooms and associated space.
• $5,970,000 to support operations and maintenance for nine facilities. 
• The act also appropriates General Funds to pay of expenditures for construction phase of Imperial and Shasta Courthouses. 

On June 27, 2022, the 2022 Budget Act (FY 2022–23) was passed, which included a capital-outlay total of $389.5 million ($169.4 million General Fund and $220.1 million Public Buildings Construction Fund) for the following: initial funding of 5 new capital projects (in Fresno, Los Angeles—Santa Clarita, Plumas, San Luis Obispo, and Solano counties); continued funding of 5 active projects (in Butte, Lake, Mendocino, San Bernardino, and Stanislaus counties); courtroom buildouts for 5 new judgeships (in Kings, Sacramento, San Joaquin and Sutter counties); and funds reappropriations for 3 active capital projects (in Butte, Monterey, and San Bernardino counties).
 

The Trial Court Facilities Act (Sen. Bill 1732) is enacted. The act provides for the shift of responsibility for trial courthouses from county to state governance, under the direction of the Judicial Council.

Facilities handles its 1,000,000th service work order.

Two courthouse construction projects were completed for the superior courts of Siskiyou and Tuolumne: New Yreka Courthouse and New Sonora Courthouse.

On June 28, 2021, the 2021 Budget Act (FY 2021–22) was passed, which included a total of $115 million for five new trial court capital-outlay projects—in Butte, Lake, Mendocino, Monterey, and San Bernardino counties—and studies for the Los Angeles and Nevada courts.

The Judicial Council completed an update to its California Trial Court Facilities Standards, which define space, functional, technical, and security requirements for the design of trial court facilities in the state of California.

The Judicial Council completed its reassessment of unfunded trial court capital-outlay projects and submitted its report to the Legislature in advance of the deadline of December 31, 2019. This report contains a statewide list of 80 trial court capital-outlay projects based on a revised prioritization methodology, which is also included. A link to this report is available at www.courts.ca.gov/documents/lr-2019-JC-reassessment-trial-court-capital-outlay-projects-gov70371_9.pdf

One courthouse construction project was completed for the superior courts of San Joaquin: New Stockton Courthouse.

On June 27, 2018, the 2018 Budget Act (FY 2018–19) was passed, which allocated the judicial branch courthouse construction program $1.3 billion for the continuing phases of 10 courthouse capital projects in in the following counties: Glenn, Imperial, Riverside (in both Indio and in Mid-County regions), Sacramento, Shasta, Siskiyou, Sonoma, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne.

The Legislature attached specific trailer bill language (Senate Bill 847 [Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review; Stats. 2018, ch. 45]) to the 2018 Budget Act. In essence, this legislative mandate has required that the Judicial Council conduct, or contract with an independent contractor to conduct, a reassessment of all its capital projects that have not been fully funded up and through the 2018 Budget Act (FY 2018–19). This reassessment to develop and submit a new Trial Court Capital-Outlay Plan for funding is due by December 31, 2019, to two legislative committees: Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review and the Assembly Committee on Budget.

The Judicial Council reorganized and restructured the Judicial Branch Capital Program Office and the Office of Real Estate and Facilities Management into Facilities Services. Facilities Services supports the court facilities of California’s Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal, and trial courts by providing strategic planning for capital outlay and funding, new courthouse design and construction, real estate transactions, environmental compliance and sustainability, facilities maintenance and modifications, and security. This office is composed of the following units: project management, facility operations, program accountability and services, quality compliance, real estate, and security operations.

Two courthouse construction projects were completed for the superior courts of Alameda and San Diego: New East County Hall of Justice, and New Central San Diego Courthouse.

Four courthouse construction projects were completed for the superior courts of Merced, Santa Clara, Sutter, and Tehama: New Los Banos Courthouse, New Santa Clara Family Justice Center, New Yuba City Courthouse, and New Red Bluff Courthouse.

Six courthouse construction projects were completed for the superior courts of Butte, Kings, Madera, Riverside, San Joaquin, and Yolo: New North Butte County Courthouse, New Hanford Courthouse, New Madera Courthouse, New Banning Justice Center, Renovation and Addition to Juvenile Justice Center, and New Woodland Courthouse.

Three courthouse construction projects were completed for the superior courts of San Benito, San Bernardino, and Solano: New Hollister Courthouse, New San Bernardino Courthouse, and Renovation to Old Solano Courthouse.

Groundbreakings celebrate the start of courthouse construction or renovation projects in Butte, Solano, and Yolo counties.

The Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, returns to the historic Stanley Mosk Library and Courts Building in Sacramento after completion of a renovation project that began in 2009.

The Court Facilities Working Group is renamed the Court Facilities Advisory Committee, and will continue to recommend policies related to the capital construction program.

The Trial Court Facility Modification Advisory Committee, previously a working group, is elevated to an advisory committee under the Judicial Council to oversee court facility modifications and maintenance throughout the state.

Three courthouse construction projects were completed for the superior court of Calaveras, Los Angeles, and Tulare: New San Andreas Courthouse, New Governor George Deukmejian Courthouse, and New South County Justice Center (Porterville).

In the wake of ongoing cuts of over $1 billion to courthouse construction funding, the Judicial Council indefinitely delays 11 courthouse projects and directs that 27 projects—in various stages of progress from site acquisition through bidding—continue, but with significant budget reductions.

The Judicial Council restructures the facilities program into the Judicial Branch Capital Program Office and the Office of Real Estate and Facilities Management.

As part of a pilot project, four trial courts take over some or all of their facilities maintenance.

By the end of year, approximately 8,500 courthouse renovation or improvement projects have been completed since the start of the program in 2005.

A courthouse construction project was completed for the superior court of Lassen county: New Susanville Courthouse.

By the end of 2011, 49 court construction projects are in various stages of progress, from site acquisition through construction.

Architect selection is completed for all planned courthouse projects--36 architectural firms are selected or hired for new courthouses and major renovation projects.

The Long Beach courthouse, the judicial branch’s first project to use the innovative performance-based infrastructure delivery method, is now under way.

By the end of 2011, approximately 7,000 major courthouse renovation or improvement projects have been completed since the start of the program in 2005.

The Court Facilities Working Group is created by the Chief Justice to oversee the facilities program throughout the state.

All 41 SB 1407 projects receive funding authorization to proceed. The capital program now totals 59 projects, either completed, current, or pending, at $6.5 billion.

Facilities handles its 100,000th service work order.

Facilities completes courthouse projects in Fresno and Pittsburg and breaks ground in Mammoth Lakes and Susanville.

Senate Bill 1407 revenue collection begins in January, officially kicking off the beginning of a historic improvement to California’s court facilities.

In February, the Legislature enacts SBX2 12, which provides an expedited funding authorization process for the acquisition and preliminary plans phases of SB 1407–funded projects.

Facilities completes a new courthouse for the Fourth District Court of Appeal, in Santa Ana, and in Portola, the first multijurisdictional courthouse, which serves the Superior Courts of Plumas and Sierra Counties.

Facilities completes transfer of all 532 court facilities to judicial branch management on December 29, 2009. (hyperlink)

Senate Bill 1407 (Perata) authorizes up to $5 billion in lease-revenue bonds for courthouse construction and renovation.

The Judicial Council adopts a list of 41 courthouse construction and renovations projects to be funded by SB 1407.

By year's end, a record number of buildings, more than 400, transfer to the state.

Funding for nine additional trial court capital-outlay projects is approved by the legislature.

Four more projects, for Superior Courts in Fresno, Mono, and Plumas Counties,are funded by the legislature.

To facilitate transfer of courthouses to judicial branch oversight, the legislature revises the Trial Court Facilities Act by enacting Senate Bill 10, which resolves liability issues for the state in taking over buildings that do not meet seismic safety standards. Under SB 10, buildings with a seismic level V rating can be transferred to the state so long as liability for all earthquake-related damage remains with the counties.

The Judicial Council adopts the Prioritization Methodology for Trial Court Capital-Outlay Projects, which results in a Trial Court Capital-Outlay Plan with projects assigned to one of five project priority groups.

Facilities contracts with three regional service providers for facility management services.

First meeting of Trial Court Facility Modification Working Group.

The Judicial Council adopts the first Judicial Branch Five-Year Infrastructure Plan, which documents the urgent need for a multibillion-dollar program for improvement of the state’s courthouses. The five-year plan is submitted annually to the California Department of Finance as part of the court project funding request process.

The first two trial court capital-outlay projects, in Merced and Contra Costa are funded by the Legislature.

The Prioritization Methodology for Modifications to Court Facilities is adopted by the Judicial Council.

The first transfer of a courthouse from a county to the state is completed.

Separate master plans are created for each of California’s 58 superior courts. The Judicial Council adopts the first procedure to prioritize the first two-thirds of all 340 projects identified in the master plans. This procedure is applied to 201 projects to develop the first Trial Court Capital-Outlay Plan, a prioritized list of projects.

The Trial Court Facilities Act (Sen. Bill 1732) is enacted. The act provides for the shift of responsibility for trial courthouses from county to state governance, under the direction of the Judicial Council.

The Task Force on Court Facilities identifies critical physical deficiencies in court buildings throughout the state. Its final report outlines, in broad terms, a program to improve or replace courthouses to make them safe, secure, and accessible.

The most far-reaching recommendation is that responsibility for courthouse stewardship should be shifted from the counties to the state. The task force recommends that the judicial branch, which is responsible for all court functions, should also be responsible for the buildings in which they operate.

A statewide Task Force on Court Facilities is established by statute, to document the condition of California’s existing court buildings and the need for new or modified court facilities, and to identify funding mechanisms.

The task force included 18 members: 6 who represented the courts; 6 who represented the counties; and 4 who represented the state bar and the executive branch.