BILL NUMBER: S9022
SPONSOR: FAHY
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the judiciary law, in relation to eliminating the with-
holding of state aid as an enforcement mechanism for court facility
compliance, and establishing an appeal process for proposed court facil-
ity plans; and to repeal certain provisions of such law relating thereto
 
PURPOSE:
To eliminate the withholding of state aid as an enforcement mechanism
for court facility compliance and to establish an appeal process for
proposed court facility plans
 
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
Section 1 states the legislative findings and intent
Section 2 repeals section 39-b of the judiciary law and adds three new
subdivisions 4, 5, and 6. Subdivision 4 prohibits the chief administra-
tor of the courts from withholding, reducing, suspending, seizing or
intercepting state funds to a city. Subdivision 5 states that any capi-
tal plan addressing deficiencies in a city is subject to appeal by that
city; appeals shall be heard by an independent court facilities panel
created for this purpose. Subdivision 6 states that upon a final deci-
sion of the panel created by subdivision 5, the city and the office of
court administration shall enter into a written plan consistent with the
determination.
Section 3 states that any court judgment finding a section, subdivision,
or clause of the act to be invalid shall not invalidate the rest of the
act.
Section 4 states the effective date
 
JUSTIFICATION:
The unified court system is a core function of state government, and the
state has a constitutional obligation to ensure that courts are safe,
accessible, and able to carry out the administration of justice. Under
existing law, cities are responsible for providing suitable and suffi-
cient court facilities, and the chief administrator of the courts is
authorized to establish and enforce minimum standards for those facili-
ties.
However, recently, withholding or seizure of state aid to local govern-
ments has become counterproductive. This enforcement structure may pres-
sure municipalities to accept capital plans without a meaningful oppor-
tunity to challenge their scope, sequencing, or feasibility, and may
jeopardize local fiscal stability and the provision of essential munici-
pal services.
The provision this legislation seeks to repeal was established at a time
when municipal finances were significantly more robust. Given current
economic turbulence and shrinking tax bases, withholding needed funding
from local governments is overly punishing and unproductive; fiscally
stressed cities cannot afford to make capital improvements to their
courts.
This legislation is intended to eliminate the withholding of state aid
as an enforcement mechanism for court facility compliance, while
preserving existing court facility standards and establishing a fair,
transparent, and independent process for reviewing and resolving
disputes concerning proposed court facility plans.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
New bill
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
No fiscal impact on the state
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately after it has become a law

Statutes affected:
S9022: 39-b judiciary law, 39-b(4) judiciary law