Washington 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Enacted Bipartisan · 26 D · 3 R cosponsors

HB 1064 — Concerning law enforcement.

Last action — Effective date 2/4/2019.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed House
  4. ✓
    Passed Senate
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced December 17, 2018. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 98% · high confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 39 sponsors

    1 primary, 38 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Bipartisan support

    Sponsored across 2 parties (26 D · 3 R) — cross-party backing.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 2 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

1 added · 1 removed

Plain-language change summary

The latest version of Bill HB 1064 introduces several key changes aimed at improving law enforcement training and accountability. It emphasizes the requirement for police officers to provide first aid to individuals in their care at the earliest safe opportunity and outlines training on de-escalation tactics and mental health considerations. Additionally, the bill mandates that independent investigations take place whenever an officer's use of deadly force results in serious injury or death, ensuring that these inquiries are separate from the involved agency. These changes are significant as they aim to enhance public trust in law enforcement while prioritizing community safety and well-being.

→
Previous
Latest
H-0490.1SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1064State of Washington66th Legislature2019 Regular SessionByHouse Public Safety (originally sponsored by Representatives Goodman, Klippert, Sells, Ryu, Orwall, Irwin, Ortiz-Self, Pellicciotti, Kirby, Appleton, Lovick, Dolan, Springer, Barkis, Santos, Griffey, Kloba, Smith, Doglio, Gregerson, Shewmake, Pollet, Tarleton, Valdez, Peterson, Fey, Stanford, Slatter, Tharinger, Hansen, Wylie, Fitzgibbon, Jinkins, Macri, Bergquist, Chambers, Graham, Frame, and Reeves)READ FIRST TIME 01/17/19.AN ACT Relating to law enforcement;
H-0244.2HOUSE BILL 1064State of Washington66th Legislature2019 Regular SessionByRepresentatives Goodman, Klippert, Sells, Ryu, Orwall, Irwin, Ortiz-Self, Pellicciotti, Kirby, Appleton, Lovick, Dolan, Springer, Barkis, Santos, Griffey, Kloba, Smith, Doglio, Gregerson, Shewmake, Pollet, Tarleton, Valdez, Peterson, Fey, Stanford, Slatter, Tharinger, Hansen, Wylie, Fitzgibbon, Jinkins, Macri, Bergquist, Chambers, Graham, Frame, and ReevesPrefiled 12/17/18.Read first time 01/14/19.Referred to Committee on Public Safety.AN ACT Relating to law enforcement;
amending 2019 c 1 s 9 (uncodified);
amending RCW 43.101.--- and 36.28A.---;
reenacting and amending RCW 43.101.455, 36.28A.445, and 9A.16.040;
amending 2019 c ...
s 9 (uncodified);
reenacting and amending RCW 9A.16.040;
repealing RCW 10.114.010, 10.114.020, and 9A.16.045;
repealing RCW 10.114.010, 10.114.020, 9A.16.045, 43.101.450, 43.101.452, 43.101.455, and 36.28A.445;
repealing 2018 c 10 ss 1, 2, and 3 and 2018 c 11 ss 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7;
repealing 2018 c 10 s 3 and 2018 c 11 s 7;
RCW 43.101.455 and 2019 c 1 s 5 (Initiative Measure No.
RCW 43.101.--- and 2019 c ...
940) are each reenacted and amended to read as follows:(1) Within six months after December 6, 2018, the commission must consult with law enforcement agencies and community stakeholders and adopt rules for carrying out the training requirements of RCW 43.101.450 and 43.101.452.
s 5 (Initiative Measure No.
Such rules must, at a minimum:(a) Adopt training hour requirements and curriculum for initial violence de-escalation trainings required by ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019;(b) Adopt training hour requirements and curriculum for initial mental health trainings required by ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019, which may include all or part of the mental health training curricula established under RCW 43.101.227 and 43.101.427;(c) Adopt annual training hour requirements and curricula for continuing trainings required by ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019;(d) Establish means by which law enforcement officers will receive trainings required by ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019;
940) are each amended to read as follows:(1) Within six months after December 6, 2018, the commission must consult with law enforcement agencies and community stakeholders and adopt rules for carrying out the training requirements of RCW 43.101.--- and 43.101.--- (sections 3 and 4, chapter .
and(e) Require compliance with ((this act's))chapter 1, Laws of 2019 training requirements ((as a condition of maintaining certification)).(2) In developing curricula, the commission shall consider inclusion of the following:(a) De-escalation in patrol tactics and interpersonal communication training, including tactical methods that use time, distance, cover, and concealment, to avoid escalating situations that lead to violence;(b) Alternatives to jail booking, arrest, or citation in situations where appropriate;(c) Implicit and explicit bias, cultural competency, and the historical intersection of race and policing;(d) Skills including de-escalation techniques to effectively, safely, and respectfully interact with people with disabilities and/or behavioral health issues;(e) "Shoot/don't shoot" scenario training;(f) Alternatives to the use of physical or deadly force so that de-escalation tactics and less lethal alternatives are part of the decision-making process leading up to the consideration of deadly force ((is used only when unavoidable and as a last resort));(g) Mental health and policing, including bias and stigma;
(Initiative Measure No.
and(h) Using public service, including rendering of first aid, to provide a positive point of contact between law enforcement officers and community members to increase trust and reduce conflicts.(3) The initial violence de-escalation training must educate officers on the good faith standard for use of deadly force established by ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019 and how that standard advances violence de-escalation goals.(4) The commission may provide trainings, alone or in partnership with private parties or law enforcement agencies, authorize private parties or law enforcement agencies to provide trainings, or any combination thereof.
940), Laws of 2019).
Such rules must, at a minimum:(a) Adopt training hour requirements and curriculum for initial violence de-escalation trainings required by chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019;(b) Adopt training hour requirements and curriculum for initial mental health trainings required by chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019, which may include all or part of the mental health training curricula established under RCW 43.101.227 and 43.101.427;(c) Adopt annual training hour requirements and curricula for continuing trainings required by chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019;(d) Establish means by which law enforcement officers will receive trainings required by chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019;
and(e) Require compliance with chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019 training requirements ((as a condition of maintaining certification)).(2) In developing curricula, the commission shall consider inclusion of the following:(a) De-escalation in patrol tactics and interpersonal communication training, including tactical methods that use time, distance, cover, and concealment, to avoid escalating situations that lead to violence;(b) Alternatives to jail booking, arrest, or citation in situations where appropriate;(c) Implicit and explicit bias, cultural competency, and the historical intersection of race and policing;(d) Skills including de-escalation techniques to effectively, safely, and respectfully interact with people with disabilities and/or behavioral health issues;(e) "Shoot/don't shoot" scenario training;(f) Alternatives to the use of physical or deadly force so that de-escalation tactics and less lethal alternatives are part of the decision-making process leading up to the consideration of deadly force ((is used only when unavoidable and as a last resort));(g) Mental health and policing, including bias and stigma;
and(h) Using public service, including rendering of first aid, to provide a positive point of contact between law enforcement officers and community members to increase trust and reduce conflicts.(3) The initial violence de-escalation training must educate officers on the good faith standard for use of deadly force established by chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019 and how that standard advances violence de-escalation goals.(4) The commission may provide trainings, alone or in partnership with private parties or law enforcement agencies, authorize private parties or law enforcement agencies to provide trainings, or any combination thereof.
RCW 36.28A.445 and 2019 c 1 s 6 (Initiative Measure No.
RCW 36.28A.--- and 2019 c ...
940) are each reenacted and amended to read as follows:(1) It is the policy of the state of Washington that all law enforcement personnel must ((render first aid to save lives))provide or facilitate first aid such that it is rendered at the earliest safe opportunity to injured persons at a scene controlled by law enforcement.(2) Within one year after December 6, 2018, the Washington state criminal justice training commission, in consultation with the Washington state patrol, the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs, organizations representing state and local law enforcement officers, health providers and/or health policy organizations, tribes, and community stakeholders, shall develop guidelines for implementing the duty to render first aid adopted in this section.
s 6 (Initiative Measure No.
940) are each amended to read as follows:(1) It is the policy of the state of Washington that all law enforcement personnel must ((render first aid to save lives))provide or facilitate first aid such that it is rendered at the earliest safe opportunity to injured persons at a scene controlled by law enforcement.(2) Within one year after December 6, 2018, the Washington state criminal justice training commission, in consultation with the Washington state patrol, the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs, organizations representing state and local law enforcement officers, health providers and/or health policy organizations, tribes, and community stakeholders, shall develop guidelines for implementing the duty to render first aid adopted in this section.
RCW 9A.16.040 and 2019 c 1 s 7 (Initiative Measure No.
RCW 9A.16.040 and 2019 c ...
s 7 (Initiative Measure No.
or(b) There is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed any crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm.Under these circumstances deadly force may also be used if necessary to prevent escape from the officer, where, if feasible, some warning is given, provided the officer meets the good faith standard of this section.(3) A public officer covered by subsection (1)(a) of this section shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force without malice and with a good faith belief that such act is justifiable pursuant to this section.(4) A ((law enforcement))peace officer shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force ((if such officer meets the good faith standard adopted in this section))in good faith, where "good faith" is an objective standard which shall consider all the facts, circumstances, and information known to the officer at the time to determine whether a similarly situated reasonable officer would have believed that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent death or serious physical harm to the officer or another individual.(5) ((The following good faith standard is adopted for law enforcement officer use of deadly force:(a) The good faith standard is met only if both the objective good faith test in (b) of this subsection and the subjective good faith test in (c) of this subsection are met.(b) The objective good faith test is met if a reasonable officer, in light of all the facts and circumstances known to the officer at the time, would have believed that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent death or serious physical harm to the officer or another individual.(c) The subjective good faith test is met if the officer intended to use deadly force for a lawful purpose and sincerely and in good faith believed that the use of deadly force was warranted in the circumstance.(d) Where the use of deadly force results in death, substantial bodily harm, or great bodily harm, an independent investigation must be completed to inform the determination of whether the use of deadly force met the objective good faith test established by this section and satisfied other applicable laws and policies.(6) For the purpose of this section, "law enforcement officer" means any law enforcement officer in the state of Washington, including but not limited to law enforcement personnel and peace officers as defined by RCW 43.101.010.)) This section shall not be construed as:(a) Affecting the permissible use of force by a person acting under the authority of RCW 9A.16.020 or 9A.16.050;
or(b) There is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed any crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm.Under these circumstances deadly force may also be used if necessary to prevent escape from the officer, where, if feasible, some warning is given, provided the officer meets the good faith standard of this section.(3) A public officer covered by subsection (1)(a) of this section shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force without malice and with a good faith belief that such act is justifiable pursuant to this section.(4) A ((law enforcement))peace officer shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force ((if such officer meets the good faith standard adopted in this section))in good faith, where "good faith" is an objective standard which shall consider all the facts, circumstances, and information known to the officer at the time to determine whether a similarly situated reasonable officer would have believed that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent death or serious physical harm to the officer or another individual.(5) ((The following good faith standard is adopted for law enforcement officer use of deadly force:(a) The good faith standard is met only if both the objective good faith test in (b) of this subsection and the subjective good faith test in (c) of this subsection are met.(b) The objective good faith test is met if a reasonable officer, in light of all the facts and circumstances known to the officer at the time, would have believed that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent death or serious physical harm to the officer or another individual.(c) The subjective good faith test is met if the officer intended to use deadly force for a lawful purpose and sincerely and in good faith believed that the use of deadly force was warranted in the circumstance.(d) Where the use of deadly force results in death, substantial bodily harm, or great bodily harm, an independent investigation must be completed to inform the determination of whether the use of deadly force met the objective good faith test established by this section and satisfied other applicable laws and policies.(6) For the purpose of this section, "law enforcement officer" means any law enforcement officer in the state of Washington, including but not limited to law enforcement personnel and peace officers as defined by RCW 43.101.010.(7))) This section shall not be construed as:(a) Affecting the permissible use of force by a person acting under the authority of RCW 9A.16.020 or 9A.16.050;
2019 c 1 s 9 (Initiative Measure No.
2019 c ...
940) (uncodified) is amended to read as follows:(1) Except where a different timeline is provided in ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019, the Washington state criminal justice training commission must adopt any rules necessary for carrying out the requirements of ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019 within one year after December 6, 2018.
s 9 (Initiative Measure No.
In carrying out all rule making under ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019, the commission shall seek input from the attorney general, law enforcement agencies, the Washington council of police and sheriffs, the Washington state fraternal order of police, the council of metropolitan police and sheriffs, the Washington state patrol troopers association, at least one association representing law enforcement who represent traditionally underrepresented communities including the black law enforcement association of Washington, tribes, and community stakeholders.
940) (uncodified) is amended to read as follows:(1) Except where a different timeline is provided in ((this act))chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019, the Washington state criminal justice training commission must adopt any rules necessary for carrying out the requirements of ((this act))chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019 within one year after December 6, 2018.
Show all 50 changed rows (10 more)
Previous
Latest
In carrying out all rule making under ((this act))chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019, the commission shall seek input from the attorney general, law enforcement agencies, the Washington council of police and sheriffs, the Washington state fraternal order of police, the council of metropolitan police and sheriffs, the Washington state patrol troopers association, at least one association representing law enforcement who represent traditionally underrepresented communities including the black law enforcement association of Washington, tribes, and community stakeholders.
and, when the deadly force is used on a tribal member, such procedures must include consultation with the member's tribe and, where appropriate, information sharing with such tribe.))(2) Where ((this act))chapter 1, Laws of 2019 requires involvement of community stakeholders, input must be sought from organizations advocating for:
and, when the deadly force is used on a tribal member, such procedures must include consultation with the member's tribe and, where appropriate, information sharing with such tribe.))(2) Where ((this act))chapter .
(Initiative Measure No.
940), Laws of 2019 requires involvement of community stakeholders, input must be sought from organizations advocating for:
940) (uncodified);(11) 2018 c 11 s 3 (Initiative Measure No.
940) (uncodified);(11) RCW 43.101.450 (Violence de-escalation training) and 2018 c 11 s 3 (Initiative Measure No.
940);(12) 2018 c 11 s 4 (Initiative Measure No.
940);(12) RCW 43.101.452 (Mental health training) and 2018 c 11 s 4 (Initiative Measure No.
940);(13) 2018 c 10 s 1 & 2018 c 11 s 5 (Initiative Measure No.
940);(13) RCW 43.101.455 (Violence de-escalation and mental health training—Adoption of rules—Training requirements) and 2018 c 10 s 1 & 2018 c 11 s 5 (Initiative Measure No.
940);(14) 2018 c 10 s 2 & 2018 c 11 s 6 (Initiative Measure No.
940);(14) RCW 36.28A.445 (Duty to provide or facilitate first aid—Development of guidelines) and 2018 c 10 s 2 & 2018 c 11 s 6 (Initiative Measure No.
View plain text versions (2)

Action History

  1. Effective date 2/4/2019.

  2. Chapter 4, 2019 Laws.

  3. Governor signed.

  4. Delivered to Governor.

  5. President signed.

  6. Speaker signed.

  7. Third reading, passed; yeas, 47; nays, 0; absent, 0; excused, 1.

  8. Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.

  9. Read first time, rules suspended, and placed on second reading calendar.

  10. Third reading, passed; yeas, 98; nays, 0; absent, 0; excused, 0.

  11. Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.

  12. 1st substitute bill substituted.

  13. Placed on second reading.

  14. 1st substitute bill substituted.

  15. Placed on second reading.

  16. Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Appropriations at 03:30 PM

  17. APP - Majority; do pass 1st substitute bill proposed by Public Safety.

  18. APP - Majority; do pass 1st substitute bill proposed by Public Safety.

  19. Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Appropriations at 03:30 PM

  20. Referred to Appropriations.

  21. Referred to Appropriations.

  22. Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Public Safety at 03:30 PM

  23. PS - Majority; 1st substitute bill be substituted, do pass.

  24. PS - Majority; 1st substitute bill be substituted, do pass.

  25. Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Public Safety at 01:30 PM

  26. First reading, referred to Public Safety.

  27. Prefiled for introduction.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 38 co-sponsors · 112 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (38)

Not signed on (112)

112 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 112 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Passed 47 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 26001
Republican 9000
Democrat 12000
Total 47001
% of votes cast 98%0%0%2%
How each member voted (48)
Member Party Vote
Bailey — Yea
Becker — Yea
Billig — Yea
Brown — Yea
Carlyle — Yea
Darneille — Yea
Das — Yea
Ericksen — Yea
Frockt — Yea
Hawkins — Yea
Hobbs — Yea
Honeyford — Yea
Keiser — Yea
Kuderer — Yea
McCoy — Yea
Mullet — Yea
O'Ban — Yea
Padden — Yea
Palumbo — Yea
Randall — Yea
Rivers — Yea
Rolfes — Yea
Sheldon — Yea
Takko — Yea
Wilson, L. — Not Voting
Zeiger — Yea
Van De Wege — Yea
Annette Cleveland Democrat Yea
Bob Hasegawa Democrat Yea
Claire Wilson Democrat Yea
Jamie Pedersen Democrat Yea
Jesse Salomon Democrat Yea
Joe Nguyen Democrat Yea
Lisa Wellman Democrat Yea
Manka Dhingra Democrat Yea
Marko Liias Democrat Yea
Rebecca Saldaña Democrat Yea
Steve Conway Democrat Yea
Victoria Hunt Democrat Yea
Curtis King Republican Yea
Jeff Holy Republican Yea
Jim Walsh Republican Yea
John Braun Republican Yea
Judy Warnick Republican Yea
Keith Wagoner Republican Yea
Mark Schoesler Republican Yea
Phil Fortunato Republican Yea
Shelly Short Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Final Passage (#2)

Passed 98 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 33000
Republican 22000
Democrat 43000
Total 98000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (98)
Member Party Vote
Appleton — Yea
Blake — Yea
Chambers — Yea
Chandler — Yea
Chopp — Yea
Cody — Yea
DeBolt — Yea
Dolan — Yea
Hoff — Yea
Hudgins — Yea
Irwin — Yea
Jenkin — Yea
Kirby — Yea
Klippert — Yea
Kraft — Yea
Kretz — Yea
Maycumber — Yea
McCaslin — Yea
Mead — Yea
Morris — Yea
Mosbrucker — Yea
Pellicciotti — Yea
Pettigrew — Yea
Sells — Yea
Shea — Yea
Smith — Yea
Sullivan — Yea
Sutherland — Yea
Tarleton — Yea
Vick — Yea
Wilcox — Yea
Young — Yea
Van Werven — Yea
Amy Walen Democrat Yea
Beth Doglio Democrat Yea
Bill Ramos Democrat Yea
Chris Kilduff Democrat Yea
Cindy Ryu Democrat Yea
Dave Paul Democrat Yea
Debra Entenman Democrat Yea
Debra Lekanoff Democrat Yea
Derek Stanford Democrat Yea
Drew Hansen Democrat Yea
Gerry Pollet Democrat Yea
Jake Fey Democrat Yea
Javier Valdez Democrat Yea
Joe Fitzgibbon Democrat Yea
John Lovick Democrat Yea
June Robinson Democrat Yea
Kristine Reeves Democrat Yea
Larry Springer Democrat Yea
Lauren Davis Democrat Yea
Laurie Jinkins Democrat Yea
Lillian Ortiz-Self Democrat Yea
Lisa Callan Democrat Yea
Marcus Riccelli Democrat Yea
Mari Leavitt Democrat Yea
Melanie Morgan Democrat Yea
Mia Gregerson Democrat Yea
Mike Chapman Democrat Yea
Monica Jurado Stonier Democrat Yea
My-Linh Thai Democrat Yea
Nicole Macri Democrat Yea
Noel Frame Democrat Yea
Roger Goodman Democrat Yea
Sharon Shewmake Democrat Yea
Sharon Tomiko Santos Democrat Yea
Sharon Wylie Democrat Yea
Shelley Kloba Democrat Yea
Steve Bergquist Democrat Yea
Steve Tharinger Democrat Yea
Strom Peterson Democrat Yea
Tana Senn Democrat Yea
Timm Ormsby Democrat Yea
Tina Orwall Democrat Yea
Vandana Slatter Democrat Yea
Alex Ybarra Republican Yea
Andrew Barkis Republican Yea
Carolyn Eslick Republican Yea
Chris Corry Republican Yea
Chris Gildon Republican Yea
Dan Griffey Republican Yea
Drew MacEwen Republican Yea
Drew Stokesbary Republican Yea
Ed Orcutt Republican Yea
Jenny Graham Republican Yea
Jeremie Dufault Republican Yea
Jim Walsh Republican Yea
Joe Schmick Republican Yea
Keith Goehner Republican Yea
Mary Dye Republican Yea
Matt Boehnke Republican Yea
Michelle Valdez Republican Yea
Mike Steele Republican Yea
Mike Volz Republican Yea
Paul Harris Republican Yea
Skyler Rude Republican Yea
Tom Dent Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

Who sponsors HB 1064?
HB 1064 is sponsored by Larry Springer (Democrat), Andrew Barkis (Republican), Sharon Tomiko Santos (Democrat), Dan Griffey (Republican), Shelley Kloba (Democrat), Smith, Beth Doglio (Democrat), Mia Gregerson (Democrat), Sharon Shewmake (Democrat), Gerry Pollet (Democrat), Tarleton, Javier Valdez (Democrat), Strom Peterson (Democrat), Jake Fey (Democrat), Derek Stanford (Democrat), Vandana Slatter (Democrat), Steve Tharinger (Democrat), Drew Hansen (Democrat), Sharon Wylie (Democrat), Joe Fitzgibbon (Democrat), Laurie Jinkins (Democrat), Nicole Macri (Democrat), Steve Bergquist (Democrat), Chambers, Jenny Graham (Republican), Noel Frame (Democrat), Kristine Reeves (Democrat), Roger Goodman (Democrat), Klippert, Sells, Cindy Ryu (Democrat), Tina Orwall (Democrat), Irwin, Lillian Ortiz-Self (Democrat), Pellicciotti, Kirby, Appleton, John Lovick (Democrat), and Dolan.
What is the current status of HB 1064?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced December 17, 2018. Enacted.
Where can I track HB 1064?
Track HB 1064 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on HB 1064

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of HB 1064

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →