California 20252026 Regular Session Status: Introduced 1 D cosponsors

AB 2567 — CalWORKs: immediate assistance.

Last action — In committee: Held under submission.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

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

This bill has been introduced in the Assembly. Introduced February 20, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.

Next likely step: a committee referral and hearing.

Prognosis

Stalled 28% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

Low

How often bills like it became law.

  • Introduced

    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 5 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.

In plain language

The bill modifies how immediate assistance is determined for CalWORKs applicants.

This bill changes the process for counties to determine if CalWORKs applicants need immediate assistance without requiring them to apply for certain incomes first. It also addresses costs for local agencies mandated by the state.

What this means for you
  • Families: Families seeking immediate assistance through CalWORKs may find the application process more accessible.

Summary

Existing law establishes the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which, through a combination of federal, state, and county funds, each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families. Existing law requires the county, at the time of application, to determine whether the applicant needs immediate assistance because the applicant does not have sufficient resources to meet their emergency needs, and to determine whether the applicant is apparently eligible for CalWORKs aid. Existing law requires the county to determine that the applicant needs immediate assistance if the family's total available liquid resources are less than $100 and there is an emergency situation. Under existing law, apparent eligibility exists when evidence presented by the applicant or which is otherwise available to the county welfare department and the information provided on the application documents indicate that there would be eligibility for CalWORKs aid if the evidence and information were verified. If an applicant needs immediate assistance, and is apparently eligible for CalWORKs aid, existing law requires the county to pay the applicant $200 or the maximum amount for which that applicant is eligible, whichever is less. Under the CalWORKs program, there is also an allowance for nonrecurring special needs for homeless assistance available to a family that is homeless and seeking shelter when the family is either eligible for or apparently eligible for CalWORKs aid. This bill would require the county to make a determination of apparent eligibility for immediate assistance and for homeless assistance without requiring, as a prerequisite to making that determination, that the applicant apply for any unconditionally available income the applicant does not currently receive. To the extent that the bill would expand counties' duties relating to apparent eligibility determinations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would instead provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of the bill. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. In committee: Held under submission.

  2. In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  3. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  4. Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.

  5. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 66. Noes 5.)

  7. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  8. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 1.) (May 14).

  9. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  10. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  11. Read second time and amended.

  12. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (March 24).

  13. Re-referred to Com. on HUM. S.

  14. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on HUM. S. Read second time and amended.

  15. Referred to Com. on HUM. S.

  16. From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.

  17. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 5 voted No

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

AB 2567 Celeste Rodriguez Assembly Third Reading

Passed 66 Yea · 5 Nay · 9 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 57002
Republican 8507
Unaffiliated 1000
Total 66509
% of votes cast 83%6%0%11%
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 Yea
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 Not Voting
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 Not Voting
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 Nay
Dixon, Diane Republican Not Voting
Ellis, Stan Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Not Voting
Gonzalez, Jeff Republican Yea
Hadwick, Heather Republican Not Voting
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea
Johnson, Natasha Republican Not Voting
Lackey, Tom Republican Not Voting
Macedo, Alexandra Republican Nay
Patterson, Joe Republican Not Voting
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay
Ta, Tri Republican Not Voting
Tangipa, David J. Republican Nay
Wallis, Greg Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 12 Yea · 1 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 11000
Republican 1102
Total 12102
% of votes cast 80%7%0%13%
How each member voted (15)
Member Party Vote
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Caloza, Jessica Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Krell, Maggy Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Sharp-Collins, LaShae Democratic Yea
Solache, Jr., José Luis Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Not Voting
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Not Voting
Tangipa, David J. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 6 Yea · 1 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 5000
Republican 1100
Total 6100
% of votes cast 86%14%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Elhawary, Sade Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Solache, Jr., José Luis Democratic Yea
Castillo, Leticia Republican Yea
Tangipa, David J. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety housing labor health-insurance
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 AB 2567 do?
Existing law establishes the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which, through a combination of federal, state, and county funds, each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families. Existing law requires the county, at the time of application, to determine whether the applicant needs immediate assistance because the applicant does not have sufficient resources to meet their emergency needs, and to determine whether the applicant is apparently eligible for CalWORKs aid. Existing law requires the county to determine that the applicant needs immediate assistance if the family's total available liquid resources are less than $100 and there is an emergency situation. Under existing law, apparent eligibility exists when evidence presented by the applicant or which is otherwise available to the county welfare department and the information provided on the application documents indicate that there would be eligibility for CalWORKs aid if the evidence and information were verified. If an applicant needs immediate assistance, and is apparently eligible for CalWORKs aid, existing law requires the county to pay the applicant $200 or the maximum amount for which that applicant is eligible, whichever is less. Under the CalWORKs program, there is also an allowance for nonrecurring special needs for homeless assistance available to a family that is homeless and seeking shelter when the family is either eligible for or apparently eligible for CalWORKs aid. This bill would require the county to make a determination of apparent eligibility for immediate assistance and for homeless assistance without requiring, as a prerequisite to making that determination, that the applicant apply for any unconditionally available income the applicant does not currently receive. To the extent that the bill would expand counties' duties relating to apparent eligibility determinations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law continuously appropriates moneys from the General Fund to defray a portion of county costs under the CalWORKs program. This bill would instead provide that the continuous appropriation would not be made for purposes of the bill. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors AB 2567?
AB 2567 is sponsored by Rodriguez, Celeste (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 2567?
This bill has been introduced in the Assembly. Introduced February 20, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Where can I track AB 2567?
Track AB 2567 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2567

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.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 2567

Last checked for changes about 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →