Sale of county courthouses.
Summary
Existing law authorizes the Judicial Council to dispose of surplus court facilities pursuant to a specified process that requires, among other things, the Judicial Council to consult with the county where the court facility is located, offer the facility to the county at a fair market value before offering it to another state or local government agency, and deposit the funds received from a sale into the State Court Facilities Construction Fund. The process further requires the Judicial Council, if the court facility was previously the responsibility of a county, to comply with certain requirements applicable to the sale of surplus state property. Existing law establishes the Immediate and Critical Needs Account within the State Court Facilities Construction Fund. The California Constitution requires the proceeds from the sale of surplus state property to be deposited into the Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties, a continuously appropriated fund. This bill would, notwithstanding any other law, specifically authorize the Judicial Council to sell the Chico, Corning, Clovis, Firebaugh, Reedley, Avenal, and Corcoran superior courthouses, as specified, if the sale complies with certain requirements applicable to the disposal of court facilities and the Judicial Council consults with, and first offers the right to purchase the property to, the county in which the property is located. The bill would require the net proceeds from the sale of the courthouses to be deposited into the Immediate and Critical Needs Account of the State Court Facilities Construction Fund. The bill would state that the disposition of this property is not a sale or other disposition of surplus state property within the meaning of the California Constitution. The bill would make legislative findings in support of its provisions. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2017
Committee Review
Sep 2017
Senate Passage
May 2017
Assembly Passage
Sep 2017
Signed into Law
Sep 2017
Introduced Feb 15, 2017
Signed Sep 28, 2017
Floor votes · Senate Jun 1, 2017 · Assembly Sep 14, 2017
How they voted
32–0
Passed
Total votes 32
Jun 1, 2017
D
Democratic22
100% Yea
R
Republican10
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
25
Key actions
7
Committee
6
Sep 28, 2017
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Sep 14, 2017
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (69-0)
assembly
Sep 1, 2017
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (September 1).
lower
Jun 20, 2017
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (June 20). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 12, 2017
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Jun 1, 2017
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (32-0)
senate
May 25, 2017
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 1184.) (May 25).
upper
Mar 29, 2017
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 539.) (March 28). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Feb 23, 2017
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Feb 15, 2017
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Anthony Cannella
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 403
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 403. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline