California 20252026 Regular Session Status: To Executive 1 D cosponsors

SB 486 — Regional housing: public postsecondary education: changes in enrollment levels: California Environmental Quality Act.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 517, Statutes of 2025.

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

This bill has been sent to the executive. Introduced February 19, 2025. It awaits signature.

Next likely step: the executive signs it into law or issues a veto.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 64% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

Moderate

How often bills like it became law.

  • To Executive

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 8 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.

Summary

(1) Existing law requires certain transportation planning agencies to prepare and adopt regional transportation plans directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system. Existing law requires each regional transportation plan to include a sustainable communities strategy prepared by each metropolitan planning organization in order to, among other things, identify areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, including all economic segments of the population, over the course of the planning period of the regional transportation plan taking into account net migration into the region, population growth, household formation, and employment growth. This bill would require the sustainable communities strategy, in identifying areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, to also take into account changes in enrollment levels at institutions of public higher education, as defined. By imposing additional duties on metropolitan planning organizations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, which includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires, for the 4th and subsequent revision of the housing element, the Department of Housing and Community Development to determine the existing and projected need for housing for each region in a specified manner. Existing law requires the department to meet and consult with the council of governments regarding the assumptions and methodologies to be used to determine each region's housing needs and requires the council of governments to provide data assumptions from the council of governments' projections, including specified data for the region, if available. As part of that requirement, existing law directs the council of governments to provide data assumptions regarding anticipated household growth associated with projected population increases. This bill would require the Department of Finance to consider changes in enrollment levels at campuses of the University of California or the California State University in the region, as forecasted by the University of California and California State University pursuant to the provisions described below, when preparing the anticipated household growth associated with projected population increases. Existing law requires each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, to develop a proposed methodology for distributing the existing and projected regional housing need to cities, counties, and cities and counties within the region or within the subregion, as provided. Existing law requires, to the extent that sufficient data is available, each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, in developing the methodology, to consider including several specified factors, including the housing needs generated by the presence of a private university or a campus of the California State University or the University of California within any member jurisdiction. This bill would require each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, in developing the proposed methodology, to also consider including the distribution of students of the above-described universities among jurisdictions within the region, and for a campus of the California State University or the University of California, the optimization of transit, pedestrian, and other nonvehicle trip efficiency by students to the campus, including off-campus facilities. The bill would request the Regents of the University of California, and require the Trustees of the California State University, to provide, no more than 6 months before the development of the proposed methodology for the 7th and each subsequent housing element cycle, except as specified, to each council of governments a forecast of changes in enrollment levels at its campuses, including off-campus facilities, within the region based on specified factors and to provide, upon request, trip and travel data. By imposing additional duties on councils of government, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) CEQA requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project that the lead agency proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. Existing law makes the selection of a location for a particular campus of public higher education and the approval of a long-range development plan subject to CEQA and requires preparation of an EIR. Existing law provides that enrollment or changes in enrollment, by themselves, do not constitute a project for purposes of CEQA. CEQA regulations require an EIR to describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, including a "no project" alternative analysis for the purpose of allowing decisionmakers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project. This bill would specify that the University of California and the California State University are not required to conduct a "no project" alternative analysis in an EIR, a supplemental EIR, or an addendum for a development project, for which the University of California or the California State University, respectively, is the lead agency, if specified conditions are met, including that the University of California or the California State University, respectively, has provided the forecast of changes in enrollment levels for purposes of developing the most recent methodology pursuant to the above-described provisions. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.01 of the Government Code proposed by SB 233, AB 650, and AB 1275 to be operative only if this bill and one, two, or all of the other bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.04 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 and AB 1275 to be operative only if this bill and one or both of the other bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 517, Statutes of 2025.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 11 a.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 2831.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3070.) Ordered to the Senate.

  7. Ordered to third reading.

  8. Read third time and amended.

  9. Read third time and amended.

  10. Ordered to third reading.

  11. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  12. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (August 20).

  13. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  14. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (July 14).

  15. Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 49. Noes 15. Page 2578.)

  16. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  17. Referred to Coms. on H. & C.D. and NAT. RES.

  18. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  19. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 1250.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  20. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  21. From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.

  22. Set for hearing May 19.

  23. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 963.) (April 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  24. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E.Q.

  25. Set for hearing April 30.

  26. April 23 hearing postponed by committee.

  27. Set for hearing April 23.

  28. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E.Q.

  29. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on E.Q. (Ayes 11. Noes 0. Page 609.) (April 1).

  30. Set for hearing April 1.

  31. Referred to Coms. on HOUSING and E.Q.

  32. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 22.

  33. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"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 38 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 28002
Republican 10000
Total 38002
% of votes cast 95%0%0%5%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Arreguín, Jesse Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Cabaldon, Christopher Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Not Voting
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
McNerney, Jerry Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Pérez, Sasha Renée Democratic Not Voting
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Richardson, Laura Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 79 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 58001
Republican 20000
Unaffiliated 1000
Total 79001
% of votes cast 99%0%0%1%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Ávila Farías — Yea
Addis, Dawn Democratic Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Ahrens, Patrick Democratic Yea
Alvarez, David Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bains, Jasmeet Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Caloza, Jessica Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Elhawary, Sade Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Garcia, Robert Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Harabedian, John Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Not Voting
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Krell, Maggy Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Patel, Darshana R. Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Ransom, Rhodesia Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rodriguez, Celeste Democratic Yea
Rodriguez, Michelle Democratic Yea
Rogers, Chris Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Schultz, Nick Democratic Yea
Sharp-Collins, LaShae Democratic Yea
Solache, Jr., José Luis Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Yea
Stefani, Catherine Democratic Yea
Valencia, Avelino Democratic Yea
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Yea
Castillo, Leticia Republican Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Davies, Laurie Republican Yea
DeMaio, Carl Republican Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Yea
Ellis, Stan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Gonzalez, Jeff Republican Yea
Hadwick, Heather Republican Yea
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea
Johnson, Natasha Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Macedo, Alexandra Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea
Sanchez, Kate Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Yea
Tangipa, David J. Republican Yea
Wallis, Greg Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 15 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 11000
Republican 4000
Total 15000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (15)
Member Party Vote
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Caloza, Jessica Democratic Yea
Elhawary, Sade Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Solache, Jr., José Luis Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Yea
Gonzalez, Jeff Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Yea
Tangipa, David J. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 13 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 9001
Republican 4000
Total 13001
% of votes cast 93%0%0%7%
How each member voted (14)
Member Party Vote
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Garcia, Robert Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Schultz, Nick Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Not Voting
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Yea
Ellis, Stan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 11 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 3000
Democratic 7001
Unaffiliated 1000
Total 11001
% of votes cast 92%0%0%8%
How each member voted (12)
Member Party Vote
Ávila Farías — Yea
Caloza, Jessica Democratic Yea
Garcia, Robert Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Not Voting
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Yea
Tangipa, David J. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 39 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 29001
Republican 10000
Total 39001
% of votes cast 98%0%0%3%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Arreguín, Jesse Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Cabaldon, Christopher Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
McNerney, Jerry Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Pérez, Sasha Renée Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Not Voting
Richardson, Laura Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 8 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 6000
Republican 2000
Total 8000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Pérez, Sasha Renée Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 11 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 2000
Democratic 9000
Total 11000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Arreguín, Jesse Democratic Yea
Cabaldon, Christopher Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly 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

What does SB 486 do?
(1) Existing law requires certain transportation planning agencies to prepare and adopt regional transportation plans directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system. Existing law requires each regional transportation plan to include a sustainable communities strategy prepared by each metropolitan planning organization in order to, among other things, identify areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, including all economic segments of the population, over the course of the planning period of the regional transportation plan taking into account net migration into the region, population growth, household formation, and employment growth. This bill would require the sustainable communities strategy, in identifying areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, to also take into account changes in enrollment levels at institutions of public higher education, as defined. By imposing additional duties on metropolitan planning organizations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, which includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires, for the 4th and subsequent revision of the housing element, the Department of Housing and Community Development to determine the existing and projected need for housing for each region in a specified manner. Existing law requires the department to meet and consult with the council of governments regarding the assumptions and methodologies to be used to determine each region's housing needs and requires the council of governments to provide data assumptions from the council of governments' projections, including specified data for the region, if available. As part of that requirement, existing law directs the council of governments to provide data assumptions regarding anticipated household growth associated with projected population increases. This bill would require the Department of Finance to consider changes in enrollment levels at campuses of the University of California or the California State University in the region, as forecasted by the University of California and California State University pursuant to the provisions described below, when preparing the anticipated household growth associated with projected population increases. Existing law requires each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, to develop a proposed methodology for distributing the existing and projected regional housing need to cities, counties, and cities and counties within the region or within the subregion, as provided. Existing law requires, to the extent that sufficient data is available, each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, in developing the methodology, to consider including several specified factors, including the housing needs generated by the presence of a private university or a campus of the California State University or the University of California within any member jurisdiction. This bill would require each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, in developing the proposed methodology, to also consider including the distribution of students of the above-described universities among jurisdictions within the region, and for a campus of the California State University or the University of California, the optimization of transit, pedestrian, and other nonvehicle trip efficiency by students to the campus, including off-campus facilities. The bill would request the Regents of the University of California, and require the Trustees of the California State University, to provide, no more than 6 months before the development of the proposed methodology for the 7th and each subsequent housing element cycle, except as specified, to each council of governments a forecast of changes in enrollment levels at its campuses, including off-campus facilities, within the region based on specified factors and to provide, upon request, trip and travel data. By imposing additional duties on councils of government, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) CEQA requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project that the lead agency proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. Existing law makes the selection of a location for a particular campus of public higher education and the approval of a long-range development plan subject to CEQA and requires preparation of an EIR. Existing law provides that enrollment or changes in enrollment, by themselves, do not constitute a project for purposes of CEQA. CEQA regulations require an EIR to describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, including a "no project" alternative analysis for the purpose of allowing decisionmakers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project. This bill would specify that the University of California and the California State University are not required to conduct a "no project" alternative analysis in an EIR, a supplemental EIR, or an addendum for a development project, for which the University of California or the California State University, respectively, is the lead agency, if specified conditions are met, including that the University of California or the California State University, respectively, has provided the forecast of changes in enrollment levels for purposes of developing the most recent methodology pursuant to the above-described provisions. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.01 of the Government Code proposed by SB 233, AB 650, and AB 1275 to be operative only if this bill and one, two, or all of the other bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.04 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 and AB 1275 to be operative only if this bill and one or both of the other bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors SB 486?
SB 486 is sponsored by Cabaldon, Christopher (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 486?
This bill has been sent to the executive. Introduced February 19, 2025. It awaits signature.
Where can I track SB 486?
Track SB 486 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 486

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 SB 486

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →