Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Board approves demolition of old Shasta County courthouse, keeps options for future park or parking
Loading...
Summary
After months of study, the Board voted 4‑1 to demolish the vacant old courthouse building and begin the environmental and demolition work; supervisors directed staff to explore grant funding and return with options for future use of the site.
The Shasta County Board of Supervisors voted 4‑1 on March 18 to demolish the long‑vacant old courthouse campus and begin the environmental and procurement steps needed for demolition, while reserving time to decide what should replace the building.
Public Works Director Troy Bartolome told the board demolition options ranged from a full teardown and new parking (estimated demolition cost about $5.3 million) to partial demolition to preserve a front portion of the structure (a more expensive redevelopment option estimated around $17.5 million). Bartolome said leaving the building standing while officials decide its future costs the county an estimated $15,000–$20,000 per month in maintenance, security and deferred‑maintenance risk.
“Delay costs money,” Bartolome told the board. “The longer the building sits there, the greater the risk of vandalism, pests and hazard abatement costs.”
Deputy County Executive Officer Anne Bertain explained funding options. The county has limited capital reserves; staff recommended drawing from committed infrastructure funds set aside for public projects (including a public safety infrastructure set‑aside) to pay immediate demolition and environmental work. The board approved the budget amendment and authority to start environmental review and demolition procurement by a 4‑fifths vote.
Supervisors asked staff to pursue grant funding where feasible but to avoid grants that would lock the property into permanent constraints (for example, a requirement that the parcel remain a park “in perpetuity”). Supervisor Mike Plummer asked staff to seek grants for park amenities only if the funding does not restrict future county uses. Supervisor Corky Kellstrom urged the board to consider whether any sale or private reuse makes financial sense, noting the site’s downtown location.
The board also directed staff to look for opportunities to salvage architectural elements and to consider an auction of historic fixtures or interior material to offset demolition costs and to fund memorial elements proposed by community groups.
Troy Bartolome said preliminary schedule estimates put demolition procurement and environmental review on a timeline that could allow physical demolition during the next construction season; staff will return with a detailed schedule and any grant proposals found during the CEQA and planning process.
Supervisor Kevin Scribe, who supported demolition, said the site’s maintenance costs and liability exposure justified taking definitive action.
The action authorizes initial demolition work and budget adjustments and instructs staff to return with a public plan for the site’s long‑term reuse. The vote to demolish and authorize the budget amendment passed 4‑1.
