Concerning local government hearing examiners.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 5719 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 5719.
You're tracking SB 5719
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 5719 — Concerning local government hearing examiners.
Last action — Rules Committee relieved of further consideration. On motion, referred to Local Government.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed House
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has passed the Senate. Introduced February 10, 2025. It now moves to the second chamber.
Next likely step: consideration and a floor vote in the House.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
ModerateHow often bills like it became law.
-
Passed Senate
Current position in the legislative process.
-
2 sponsors
1 primary, 1 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (2 D).
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 1 recorded vote 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
198 added · 441 removedPlain-language change summary
The proposed changes in SB 5719 clarify that counties must adopt a hearing examiner system, rather than having the option to do so, when reviewing certain land use applications. This shift ensures that local governments consistently utilize hearing examiners to make decisions on specific development permits and zoning amendments, which could lead to more efficient and standardized processes. This matters because it aims to streamline local decision-making and potentially improve the fairness and transparency of development approvals.
ENGROSSEDS-1291.1 SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5719 State of Washington 69th Legislature 2025 Regular Session By Senate Local Government (originally sponsored by Senators Salomon and Cortes)Cortes READRead FIRSTfirst TIMEtime 02/21/25.02/10/25.
Referred to Committee on Local Government.
and amending RCW 36.70.970, 35.63.130, 35A.63.170, and 58.17.330;58.17.330.
adding a new section to chapter 36.70 RCW;
adding a new section to chapter 35.63 RCW;
adding a new section to chapter 35A.63 RCW;
and adding a new section to chapter 58.17 RCW.
(1) As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter relating to powers or duties of the planning commission to hear and issue recommendations on applications for plat approval and applications for amendments to the zoning ordinance, the county legislative authority of((may)) ashall county that does not plan under RCW 36.70A.040 may adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners may((may)) hear and issue decisions on proposals for plat approval and for amendments((amendments)) quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance when((when the amendment which is applied for is not of general applicability.
(a) Applications for conditional uses, variances, shoreline permits, or any other class of applications for or pertaining to development of land or land use;
1 ESSBSB 5719 (a)(b) ApplicationsAppeals for conditional uses, variances, shoreline permits, or any other class of applicationsadministrative fordecisions or pertainingdeterminations; to development of land or land use;
(b) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations;
The legislative authority shall prescribe procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner.examiner)).
Any(2) countyThe whichdecision vestsof inthe a hearing examiner constitutes the authorityfinal todecision, hearsubject and decide conditional uses and variances shall not be required to haveappeal aunder zoningchapter adjuster36.70C orRCW. board of adjustment.
(2)(3) EachThe county legislative authoritybody electingshall toadopt useprocedures a hearing examiner pursuant to thisbe sectionfollowed shall by ordinancea specifyhearing theexaminer legalensuring effectall of the decisions madeare byconsistent with the examinerfuture andland whether,use formap appeals of administrativeadopted permitcomprehensive decisions,plans substantialand weightcomply mustwith beclear givenand toobjective thedevelopment expertiseregulations. of the administrative decision maker.
(4) Any county which vests in a hearing examiner the authority to hear and decide conditional uses and variances shall not be required to have a zoning adjuster or board of adjustment.
(((2) Each county legislative authority electing to use a hearing examiner pursuant to this section shall by ordinance specify the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner.
or (c) Except in the case of a rezonerezone, or development agreement, the decision may be given the effect of a final decision of the legislative authority.
(3)(3))) (5) Each final decision of a hearing examiner shall be in writing and shall include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision.
Such findings and conclusions shall also set forth the manner in which the decision would((would carry out and conform to the county's comprehensive plan and the county'scounty's)) is consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and complies with clear and objective development regulations.
NEW SECTION.
A new section is added to chapter 36.70 RCW to read as follows:
(1) The county legislative authority of a county fully planning under chapter 36.70A RCW must adopt a hearing examiner system under p.
2 ESSB 5719 which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners hear and issue decisions on proposals for plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance.
In addition, the legislative authority may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner including, but not limited to:
(a) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations;
and (b) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW.
(2) The decision of the hearing examiner constitutes the final decision, subject to appeal under chapter 36.70C RCW.
(3) The legislative body shall adopt procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner ensuring all decisions are consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations.
(4) Any county which vests in a hearing examiner the authority to hear and decide conditional uses and variances is not required to have a zoning adjuster or board of adjustment.
(5) A county required to secure the services of a hearing examiner under this chapter may, at its discretion, require applicants to cover reasonable costs associated with the hearing examiner's services through application fees or other cost-recovery mechanisms.
Any fees imposed under this subsection must be proportionate to the actual costs incurred and publicly disclosed in the jurisdiction's fee schedule.
(6) To enhance cost-effectiveness and improve operational efficiency, a county may enter into interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions or contract with regional or shared hearing examiners, in accordance with the provisions outlined in chapter 39.34 RCW.
(7) Each final decision of a hearing examiner must be in writing and include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision.
Such findings and conclusions must also set forth the manner in which the decision is consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and complies with clear and objective development regulations.
Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, must be rendered within 10 business days following the conclusion of all testimony and hearings.
p.
3 ESSB 5719 (8) In the event of the absence or inability of a hearing examiner to act, the county planning director must document efforts to secure a hearing examiner and provide a written determination that no qualified examiner was reasonably available.
The county planning director or other qualified planning official of the county may assume the duties and responsibilities designated to the hearing examiner under this chapter until such time that a hearing examiner is appointed and available to perform those duties.
The authority of the county planning director or other qualified planning official of the county to assume the hearing examiner's duties is limited to the duration of the vacancy or unavailability of a hearing examiner.
(9) A county may establish a process in which an applicant may elect either legislative review or hearing examiner review for any land use application covered under this chapter.
Show all 141 changed lines (101 more)
(10) Counties that are required to submit their next comprehensive plan update in 2027 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls, the requirements of this section in their next comprehensive plan update.
All other counties must implement the requirements of this section within two years of the effective date of this section.
Sec.
3.
(1)p. As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter relating to powers or duties of the planning commission to hear and report on any proposal to amend a zoning ordinance, the legislative body of a city ((or county)) with a population of 2,000 or less or county that does not plan under RCW 36.70A.040 may adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners may hear and decide applications for amending the zoning ordinance when the amendment which is applied for is not of general applicability.
2 SB 5719 (1) As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter relating to powers or duties of the planning commission to hear and report on any proposal to amend a zoning ordinance, the legislative body of a city or county ((may)) shall adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners ((may)) hear and decide applications for ((amending the zoning ordinance when the amendment which is applied for is not of general applicability.
and p.(c) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW)) plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance.
4(2) ESSBThe 5719decision (c)of Appealsthe ofhearing administrativeexaminer decisionsconstitutes orthe determinationsfinal pursuantdecision, subject to appeal under chapter 43.21C36.70C RCW.
(3) The legislative body shall prescribeadopt procedures to be followed by thea hearing examiner.examiner ensuring all decisions are consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations.
(2)(4) EachThe city or county legislative body electingshall toprescribe useprocedures a hearing examiner pursuant to thisbe sectionfollowed shall by ordinance specify the legalhearing effectexaminer. of the decisions made by the examiner and whether, for appeals of administrative permit decisions, substantial weight must be given to the expertise of the administrative decision maker.
(((2) Each city or county legislative body electing to use a hearing examiner pursuant to this section shall by ordinance specify the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner.
or (c) Except in the case of a rezonerezone, or development agreement, the decision may be given the effect of a final decision of the legislative body.
(3)(3))) (5) Each final decision of a hearing examiner shall be in writing and shall include findings and conclusions, based on the record,p. to support the decision.
Such3 findingsSB and5719 conclusionsrecord, shall also set forth the manner in which the decision would carry out and conform to thesupport city's or county's comprehensive plan and the city'sdecision. or county's development regulations.
EachSuch finalfindings decisionand ofconclusions ashall hearingalso examiner,set unlessforth athe longermanner periodin iswhich mutuallythe agreeddecision towould in((carry writingout byand conform to the applicantcity's or county's comprehensive plan and the hearingcity's examiner,or shallcounty's)) be renderedconsistent withinwith ((ten))the 10future workingland daysuse followingmap conclusion of alladopted testimonycomprehensive plans and hearings.complies with clear and objective development regulations.
NEWEach SECTION.final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, shall be rendered within ten working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings.
4.3.
A new section is added to chapter 35.63 RCW to read as follows:
(1) The legislative body of a city with a population greater than 2,000 or county fully planning under chapter 36.70A RCW must adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners hear and decide applications for plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance.
In addition, the legislative body may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should p.
5 ESSB 5719 be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner including, but not limited to:
(a) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations;
and (b) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW.
(2) The decision of the hearing examiner constitutes the final decision, subject to appeal under chapter 36.70C RCW.
(3) The legislative body shall adopt procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner ensuring all decisions are consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations.
(4) The legislative body shall prescribe procedures to be followed by the hearing examiner.
(5) A city or county required to secure the services of a hearing examiner under this chapter may, at its discretion, require applicants to cover reasonable costs associated with the hearing examiner's services through application fees or other cost-recovery mechanisms.
Any fees imposed under this subsection must be proportionate to the actual costs incurred and publicly disclosed in the jurisdiction's fee schedule.
(6) To enhance cost-effectiveness and improve operational efficiency, the legislative body may enter into interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions or contract with regional or shared hearing examiners, in accordance with the provisions outlined in chapter 39.34 RCW.
(7) Each final decision of a hearing examiner must be in writing and include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision.
Such findings and conclusions must also set forth the manner in which the decision is consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and complies with clear and objective development regulations.
Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, must be rendered within 10 business days following the conclusion of all testimony and hearings.
(8) In the event of the absence or inability of a hearing examiner to act, the city or county planning director must document efforts to secure a hearing examiner and provide a written determination that no qualified examiner was reasonably available.
The city or county planning director or other qualified planning official of the city or county may assume the duties and p.
6 ESSB 5719 responsibilities designated to the hearing examiner under this chapter until such time that a hearing examiner is appointed and available to perform those duties.
The authority of the city or county planning director or other qualified planning official of the city or county to assume the hearing examiner's duties is limited to the duration of the vacancy or unavailability of a hearing examiner.
(9) A city or county may establish a process in which an applicant may elect either legislative review or hearing examiner review for any land use application covered under this chapter.
(10) Cities or counties that are required to submit their next comprehensive plan update in 2027 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls, the requirements of this section in their next comprehensive plan update.
All other cities and counties must implement the requirements of this section within two years of the effective date of this section.
Sec.
5.
(1) As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter relating to powers or duties of the planning commission to hear and report on any proposal to amend a zoning ordinance, the legislative body of a city with((may)) ashall population of 2,000 or less may adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners may((may)) hear and decide applications for amending((amending)) plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance when((when the amendment which is applied for is not of general applicability.
and (c) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW.RCW)).
(2) The legislativedecision bodyof shallthe prescribehearing proceduresexaminer toconstitutes bethe followedfinal bydecision, asubject hearingto examiner.appeal under chapter 36.70C RCW.
(3) The legislative body shall adopt procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner ensuring all decisions are consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations.
(4) The legislative body shall prescribe procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner.
74 ESSBSB 5719 (2)(((2) Each city legislative body electing to use a hearing examiner pursuant to this section shall by ordinance specify the legal effect of the decisions made by the examinerexaminer. and whether, for appeals of administrative permit decisions, substantial weight must be given to the expertise of the administrative decision maker.
or (c) Except in the case of a rezonerezone, or development agreement, the decision may be given the effect of a final decision of the legislative body.
(3)(3))) (5) Each final decision of a hearing examiner shall be in writing and shall include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision.
Such findings and conclusions shall also set forth the manner in which the decision would carry((carry out and conform toto)) be consistent with the future land use map of the city's comprehensive plan and the city's clear and objective development regulations.
NEW SECTION.
6.4.
A new section is added to chapter 35A.63 RCW to read as follows:
(1) The legislative body of a city with a population greater than 2,000 must adopt a hearing examiner system under which a hearing examiner or hearing examiners hear and decide applications for plat approval and for quasi-judicial development permit applications subject to the zoning ordinance.
In addition, the legislative body may vest in a hearing examiner the power to hear and decide those issues it believes should be reviewed and decided by a hearing examiner including, but not limited to:
(a) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations;
and (b) Appeals of administrative decisions or determinations pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW.
(2) The decision of the hearing examiner constitutes the final decision, subject to appeal under chapter 36.70C RCW.
p.
8 ESSB 5719 (3) The legislative body shall adopt procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner ensuring all decisions are consistent with the future land use map of adopted comprehensive plans and comply with clear and objective development regulations.
(4) The legislative body shall prescribe procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner.
If the legislative authority vests in a hearing examiner the authority to hear and decide variances, then the provisions of RCW 35A.63.110 do not apply to the city.
(5) A city required to secure the services of a hearing examiner under this chapter may, at its discretion, require applicants to cover reasonable costs associated with the hearing examiner's services through application fees or other cost-recovery mechanisms.
Any fees imposed under this subsection must be proportionate to the actual costs incurred and publicly disclosed in the jurisdiction's fee schedule.
(6) To enhance cost-effectiveness and improve operational efficiency, the legislative body may enter into interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions or contract with regional or shared hearing examiners, in accordance with the provisions outlined in chapter 39.34 RCW.
(7) Each final decision of a hearing examiner must be in writing and include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision.
Such findings and conclusions must also set forth the manner in which the decision is consistent with the future land use map of the city's comprehensive plan and the city's clear and objective development regulations.
Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the hearing examiner, must be rendered within 10 business days following the conclusion of all testimony and hearings.
(8) In the event of the absence or inability of a hearing examiner to act, the city planning director must document efforts to secure a hearing examiner and provide a written determination that no qualified examiner was reasonably available.
The city planning director or other qualified planning official of the city may assume the duties and responsibilities designated to the hearing examiner under this chapter until such time that a hearing examiner is appointed and available to perform those duties.
The authority of the city planning director or other qualified planning official of the city to assume the hearing examiner's duties is limited to the duration of the vacancy or unavailability of a hearing examiner.
p.
9 ESSB 5719 (9) A city may establish a process in which an applicant may elect either legislative review or hearing examiner review for any land use application covered under this chapter.
(10) Cities that are required to submit their next comprehensive plan update in 2027 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls, the requirements of this section in their next comprehensive plan update.
All other cities must implement the requirements of this section within two years of the effective date of this section.
Sec.
7.
(1) As an alternative to those provisions of this chapter requiring a planning commission to hear and issue recommendations for plat approval, the county ((oror city legislative body may((may)) adopt a hearing examiner system and shall specify by ordinance the legal effect of the decisions made by the examiner)) legislative body of a county that does not plan under RCW 36.70A.040 or the city legislative body of a city with a population of 2,000 or less may adopt a hearing examiner system and((and shall specify by ordinance the legal effect of the decisions made by the examinerexaminer. and whether, for appeals of administrative permit decisions, substantial weight must be given to the expertise of the administrative decision maker.
or (c) The decision may be given the effect of a final decision of the legislative body.body.)) for all quasi-judicial land use decisions including, but not limited to, preliminary plats, planned unit developments, variances, and conditional use approvals.
The legislative authority shall prescribe procedures to be followed by a hearing examiner.
(2) Each final decision of a hearing examiner shall be in writing and shall include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision.
Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to by the applicant and the hearing examiner, shall be rendered within ((ten)) 10 working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings.
105 ESSBSB 5719 NEW(2) SECTION.The decision of the hearing examiner constitutes the final decision on all quasi-judicial permit applications including, but not limited to, preliminary plat, planned unit development, variance, and conditional use applications, subject to appeal under chapter 36.70C RCW.
Sec.
8.
A new section is added to chapter 58.17 RCW to read as follows:
(1) The county legislative body of a county fully planning under chapter 36.70A RCW or the city legislative body of a city with a population greater than 2,000 must adopt a hearing examiner system for all quasi-judicial land use decisions including, but not limited to, preliminary plats, planned unit developments, variances, and conditional use approvals.
(2) The decision of the hearing examiner constitutes the final decision on all quasi-judicial permit applications including, but not limited to, preliminary plat, planned unit development, variance, and conditional use applications, subject to appeal under chapter 36.70C RCW.
(((2))) (5) TheEach legislativefinal authoritydecision required to secure the services of a hearing examiner undershall thisbe chapterin may,writing atand itsshall discretion,include requirefindings applicantsand toconclusions, coverbased reasonableon costs associated with the hearingrecord, examiner'sto servicessupport throughthe applicationdecision. fees or other cost-recovery mechanisms.
AnyEach feesfinal imposeddecision underof thisa subsectionhearing mustexaminer, beunless proportionatea longer period is mutually agreed to by the actualapplicant costsand incurredthe andhearing publiclyexaminer, disclosedshall inbe therendered jurisdiction'swithin feeten schedule.working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings.
(6) To enhance cost-effectiveness and improve operational efficiency, the legislative authority may enter into interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions or contract with regional or shared hearing examiners, in accordance with the provisions outlined in chapter 39.34 RCW.
(7) Each final decision of a hearing examiner must be in writing and include findings and conclusions, based on the record, to support the decision.
Each final decision of a hearing examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to by the applicant and the hearing examiner, must be rendered within 10 business days following the conclusion of all testimony and hearings.
(8) In the event of the absence or inability of a hearing examiner to act, the city or county planning director must document efforts to secure a hearing examiner and provide a written p.
11 ESSB 5719 determination that no qualified examiner was reasonably available.
The city or county planning director or other qualified planning official of the city or county may assume the duties and responsibilities designated to the hearing examiner under this chapter until such time that a hearing examiner is appointed and available to perform those duties.
The authority of the city or county planning director or other qualified planning official of the city or county to assume the hearing examiner's duties is limited to the duration of the vacancy or unavailability of a hearing examiner.
(9) A city or county may establish a process in which an applicant may elect either legislative review or hearing examiner review for any land use application covered under this chapter.
(10) Cities or counties that are required to submit their next comprehensive plan update in 2027 pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls, the requirements of this section in their next comprehensive plan update.
All other cities and counties must implement the requirements of this section within two years of the effective date of this section.
126 ESSBSB 5719
Show all 141 changed rows (101 more)
View plain text versions (3)
- Bill View text Current pdf
- Substitute Engrossed Substitute Bill pdf
- Substitute Substitute Bill pdf
Action History
-
Rules Committee relieved of further consideration. On motion, referred to Local Government.
-
By resolution, reintroduced and retained in present status.
-
By resolution, returned to Senate Rules Committee for third reading.
-
Referred to Appropriations.
-
Minority; without recommendation.
-
Minority; do not pass.
-
LG - Majority; do pass with amendment(s).
-
Executive action taken in the House Committee on Local Government at 8:00 AM.
-
Public hearing in the House Committee on Local Government at 8:00 AM.
-
First reading, referred to Local Government.
-
Third reading, passed; yeas, 29; nays, 19; absent, 0; excused, 1.
-
Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.
-
Floor amendment(s) adopted.
-
1st substitute bill substituted (LGV 25).
-
Placed on second reading by Rules Committee.
-
Passed to Rules Committee for second reading.
-
Minority; without recommendation.
-
LGV - Majority; 1st substitute bill be substituted, do pass.
-
Executive action taken in the Senate Committee on Local Government at 1:30 PM.
-
Public hearing in the Senate Committee on Local Government at 1:30 PM.
-
First reading, referred to Local Government.
Sponsors
- Jesse Salomon · Primary
- Adrian Cortes · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 149 not signed on · 19 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Jesse Salomon Democrat
Co-sponsors (1)
- Adrian Cortes Democrat
Not signed on (149)
149 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 149 →"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.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democrat | 29 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 0 | 19 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 29 | 19 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 59% | 39% | 0% | 2% |
How each member voted (49)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Adrian Cortes | Democrat | Yea |
| Annette Cleveland | Democrat | Yea |
| Bill Ramos | Democrat | Yea |
| Bob Hasegawa | Democrat | Yea |
| Claire Wilson | Democrat | Yea |
| Claudia Kauffman | Democrat | Yea |
| Deborah Krishnadasan | Democrat | Yea |
| Derek Stanford | Democrat | Yea |
| Drew Hansen | Democrat | Yea |
| Emily Alvarado | Democrat | Yea |
| Jamie Pedersen | Democrat | Yea |
| Javier Valdez | Democrat | Yea |
| Jesse Salomon | Democrat | Yea |
| Jessica Bateman | Democrat | Yea |
| John Lovick | Democrat | Yea |
| June Robinson | Democrat | Yea |
| Lisa Wellman | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Liz Lovelett | Democrat | Yea |
| Manka Dhingra | Democrat | Yea |
| Marcus Riccelli | Democrat | Yea |
| Marko Liias | Democrat | Yea |
| Mike Chapman | Democrat | Yea |
| Noel Frame | Democrat | Yea |
| Rebecca Saldaña | Democrat | Yea |
| Sharon Shewmake | Democrat | Yea |
| Steve Conway | Democrat | Yea |
| T'wina Nobles | Democrat | Yea |
| Tina Orwall | Democrat | Yea |
| Vandana Slatter | Democrat | Yea |
| Yasmin Trudeau | Democrat | Yea |
| Chris Gildon | Republican | Nay |
| Curtis King | Republican | Nay |
| Drew MacEwen | Republican | Nay |
| Jeff Holy | Republican | Nay |
| Jeff Wilson | Republican | Nay |
| Jim McCune | Republican | Nay |
| John Braun | Republican | Nay |
| Judy Warnick | Republican | Nay |
| Keith Goehner | Republican | Nay |
| Keith Wagoner | Republican | Nay |
| Leonard Christian | Republican | Nay |
| Mark Schoesler | Republican | Nay |
| Matt Boehnke | Republican | Nay |
| Nikki Torres | Republican | Nay |
| Paul Harris | Republican | Nay |
| Perry Dozier | Republican | Nay |
| Phil Fortunato | Republican | Nay |
| Ron Muzzall | Republican | Nay |
| Shelly Short | Republican | Nay |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- Who sponsors SB 5719?
- SB 5719 is sponsored by Jesse Salomon (Democrat) and Adrian Cortes (Democrat).
- What is the current status of SB 5719?
- This bill has passed the Senate. Introduced February 10, 2025. It now moves to the second chamber.
- Where can I track SB 5719?
- Track SB 5719 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 5719
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 5719
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →