SB 673 amends Government Code Section 70624 to extend San Bernardino County’s authority to levy a surcharge — not to exceed $35 — on specified initial court filing fees. The surcharge proceeds must go into the county’s Courthouse Construction Fund and are earmarked primarily for earthquake retrofitting, renovation, and remodeling of the Central San Bernardino Courthouse, including the original 1926 building and later additions.
Why it matters: the bill locks in a local user-fee financing mechanism through January 1, 2039, and preserves the existing termination and notification mechanics (termination upon repayment of amortized costs or 30 years from bond sale, written notice requirements). For county officials, contractors, court administrators, and litigants, SB 673 determines who pays for courthouse safety upgrades and how state facility funding is adjusted when the surcharge is in effect.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill allows San Bernardino County’s Board of Supervisors, after notice and a public hearing, to impose a surcharge up to $35 on certain initial filings in civil, family, and probate matters and on first papers filed by defendants or other adverse parties. Collections go to the county’s Courthouse Construction Fund and must be used for courthouse retrofitting, renovation, and remodeling.
Who It Affects
The surcharge directly affects people who file initial court papers in the superior court in San Bernardino County (plaintiffs, petitioners, defendants filing first papers), the county treasurer administering the Courthouse Construction Fund, the Superior Court and Judicial Council (notifications and reduced state distributions), and contractors performing retrofit and renovation work.
Why It Matters
Extending the authority through 2039 extends the county’s local financing horizon and preserves a mechanism that reduces the state’s Court Facilities Construction Fund distributions when invoked. That combination shapes which projects get done locally, who pays, and how state and local responsibilities for court infrastructure are balanced.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 673 revises Section 70624 to continue a narrowly circumscribed local surcharge program for San Bernardino County through January 1, 2039. The county may impose the surcharge only after public notice and a hearing, and it applies specifically to the uniform filing fees identified in several Government Code sections for first papers in civil, family, and probate matters, as well as first papers filed on behalf of defendants, respondents, intervenors, or other adverse parties.
Proceeds from the surcharge must be deposited into San Bernardino County’s Courthouse Construction Fund and used solely for courthouse-related capital work. The text emphasizes earthquake retrofitting as a top priority and explicitly authorizes renovation and remodeling of all parts of the Central San Bernardino Courthouse, including the 1926 original structure and subsequent additions.
The statute preserves the existing termination trigger: collections stop when amortized costs are repaid or 30 years have elapsed since the sale of any bond financing the work, whichever comes first.SB 673 keeps operational checks in place: the county must notify the superior court and the Judicial Council of any surcharge change and must notify them again when the amortized costs have been repaid or the 30-year period ends. When the county imposes the surcharge, the county’s collections reduce the distribution that would otherwise flow to the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, pursuant to cross-references in the code; the bill leaves those accounting interactions intact.
The amendment is labeled technical and nonsubstantive but its core effect is to extend the sunset date for the local surcharge authority.
The Five Things You Need to Know
SB 673 extends San Bernardino County’s surcharge authority under Government Code Section 70624 so it remains in force until January 1, 2039 (previous statutory expiration moved forward).
The county may impose, after notice and a public hearing, a surcharge of up to $35 on the filing of first papers in civil, family, and probate matters and on first papers filed by defendants, respondents, intervenors, or adverse parties.
All surcharge collections must be deposited in the county’s Courthouse Construction Fund and used solely for courthouse capital purposes, with priority to earthquake retrofitting of the Central San Bernardino Courthouse (including the 1926 original building and later additions).
Collection of the surcharge terminates upon repayment of the amortized bond costs or 30 years from the bond sale, whichever occurs first; the county must notify the superior court and the Judicial Council when collections end.
When the county imposes the surcharge, the statute reduces the distribution that would otherwise go to the State Court Facilities Construction Fund in accordance with Section 70603 and related code cross-references.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Authority to impose surcharge on specified filings
This subsection authorizes the Board of Supervisors to levy a surcharge (not to exceed $35) on uniform filing fees for specified first papers in civil, family, and probate actions and on first papers filed by defendants or other adverse parties. Practically, the county must hold a public hearing and give notice before imposing or changing the surcharge, and it must put any change in writing to the superior court and the Judicial Council. The provision also ties the surcharge to the set of filing-fee code sections so clerks and fee schedules can identify which transactions carry the surcharge.
Use of proceeds, priorities, and termination conditions
Subsection (b) requires that surcharge proceeds be deposited into the Courthouse Construction Fund and used solely for the fund’s authorized capital expenses, singling out earthquake retrofitting and related renovation/remodeling for the Central San Bernardino Courthouse. It mandates a priority ordering so retrofit work is completed first and preserves the termination rule: collections stop when amortized costs are repaid or 30 years after bond sale. The county also must notify court authorities when collection stops. This creates a direct link between bond-financing schedules and fee collections, which the county must track and document.
Sunset/extension of the surcharge authority to 2039
Subsection (c) replaces the prior expiration date with January 1, 2039, so the statute automatically repeals on that date unless another statute changes it earlier. Mechanically, this is the textual change that extends the life of the surcharge program; it forces local planners to treat 2039 as the backstop date for the county’s authority unless a future legislative change occurs.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- San Bernardino County court users and local residents — they should see completed retrofit and renovation work that improves safety and functionality of the Central San Bernardino Courthouse.
- San Bernardino County government and taxpayers who support local financing — the county gains a predictable local revenue source to complete projects without waiting for state capital appropriations.
- Local construction and engineering firms — the extended program increases the likelihood of multi-year retrofit, renovation, and remodeling contracts tied to the courthouse program.
- Court staff and judges — prioritized seismic retrofit and renovations should reduce operational disruption and safety risks in the courthouse.
Who Bears the Cost
- Individuals and entities filing initial papers in affected cases in San Bernardino County — they pay the surcharge (up to $35) unless the filing fee is waived or no fee is charged.
- State Court Facilities Construction Fund — distributions to the state fund are reduced when the local surcharge is imposed, shifting some of the funding burden from state to local collections.
- San Bernardino County administrative offices and treasurer — they must administer the Courthouse Construction Fund, track bond amortization schedules, handle required notifications, and maintain accounting that separates surcharge-funded expenditures.
- Potentially low- to moderate-income litigants who do not qualify for waiver — although the surcharge is not applied where the filing fee is waived, parties who narrowly miss waiver eligibility still bear the surcharge, making the funding mechanism regressive for marginal filers.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill pits local control and expedient completion of urgent seismic and renovation work against concerns about equity and the shifting of state-level facility funding burdens onto court users: it secures funding locally and speeds projects, but it does so by levying user surcharges that are regressive and that reduce state allocations for courthouse construction.
The bill resolves a single practical problem — extending a local funding tool — but it leaves open several implementation and policy questions. First, the accounting interaction with state distributions (the statutory reduction to the State Court Facilities Construction Fund) requires careful reconciliation: counties must document how surcharge collections offset state allocations under Section 70603, and discrepancies could produce audit issues or intergovernmental disputes.
Second, the stated ‘‘solely for’’ limitation on eligible expenditures and the required priority for earthquake retrofitting raise monitoring questions: county officials will need clear project lists, procurement records, and a public ledger to show compliance, especially where renovation projects overlap with general courthouse maintenance.
There is also a distributional concern. The fee is levied at the point of filing and therefore falls on court users rather than being spread over broader tax bases; although the statute exempts waived fees, many low-income filers who do not meet waiver thresholds still pay.
Finally, administrative burden matters: the termination condition depends on bond amortization and a 30-year cap, which requires the county to monitor bond sales, amortization schedules, and to provide timely written notices to the court and Judicial Council. Absent clear guidelines or additional administrative funding, the county could struggle to maintain compliance and accurate public accounting over multiple decades.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.