Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a bill effectively ending California’s travel ban to more than half of U.S. states over their LGBTQ laws, acknowledging that it was more trouble than it was worth and replacing it with a plan to fund educational outreach to those states to try and foster acceptance of the LGBTQ community.

The ban began with legislation by Assemblyman Evan Low, a Cupertino Democrat, in 2016 that initially restricted state-funded travel to four states: Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee. But that number doubled in the law’s first year. It was at 23 states when, in July, Attorney General Rob Bonta announced his office was adding three more states — Missouri, Nebraska and Wyoming — to the list, bringing it to 26.

The growing list created problems for state leaders. Legislative analysts reported that California lawmakers had to use their own political funds to attend a National Conference of State Legislatures in Tennessee, and that others skipped events in prohibited states.

It also became a liability for Newsom, who was criticized last year for traveling to one of the banned states, Montana, to visit his wife’s family. Newsom’s office said at the time such personal and privately paid travel is not considered state sponsored but declined to say whether California footed the bill for his security staff.

State Sen. pro Tempore Toni Atkins, the powerful San Diego Democrat who authored the bill Newsom signed Wednesday, said the growing number of prohibited states suggested the ban wasn’t working and that a new approach is needed.

Her bill calls for a “BRIDGE Project” — which she said would “create a fund that could be used to create non-partisan, inclusive messaging, discourage discrimination, and help members of the LGBTQ+ community feel less isolated.”

The Legislature approved the law as an urgency measure, and it became effective immediately.

Legislative analysts said the bill would authorize outreach efforts through the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, or GO-Biz. It would cost taxpayers “about $583,000 annually for four staff at GO-Biz to oversee the BRIDGE Project fund as well as ongoing costs for the BRIDGE Projects’ education, marketing, and advertising campaigns,” analysts said, though “state costs could be offset by donations.”

Supporters argued it would “develop marketing campaigns designed to raise awareness and educate the public” in other states, while opponents said it would amount to “funding advertising and media specifically aimed at unduly influencing other states’ laws.”

Newsom in a statement thanked Atkins for “this important measure that enables California to continue taking a stand for the rights of LGBTQ+ people throughout the country and combating intolerance and hate with empathy and allyship.”

“In the face of a rising tide of anti-LGBTQ+ hate, this measure helps California’s message of acceptance, equality and hope reach the places where it is most needed,” Newsom said.

The state laws that led California to expand its travel ban mostly dealt with transgender access to school bathrooms, participation in youth sports and “gender affirming” hormonal and surgical procedures on children, a matter that has roiled school boards, health care and athletics in recent years. Advocates for those laws argue that the policies protect girls’ rights and kids, while critics called them anti-LGBTQ.

Statistics provided by the Human Rights Campaign, a pro-LGBTQ group, seemed to affirm that the travel ban wasn’t effective in preventing anti-trans or anti-LGBTQ laws and policies. The group reported in May that a record 520 “anti-LGBTQ+ bills” have been introduced in state legislatures. The group said 70 laws have been enacted, including 15 “banning gender affirming care for transgender youth,” seven “allowing misgendering of transgender students,” four “censoring school curriculum” and two “targeting drag performances.”

Atkins, who is a lesbian, said that “as the years have passed, the travel ban has had the unintended impact of further isolating members of the LGBTQ+ community in those states, and hampering Californians from being able to conduct research, business, and engage with all people from those states.”

“With an unprecedented number of anti-LGBTQ+ bills having been introduced in state legislatures nationwide, California can further position itself as a national leader on inclusivity and serve as a beacon of hope and support for those who have been isolated by state-sponsored discrimination elsewhere,” Atkins said.

Low, who is gay, has defended AB 1887 and argued that repealing it would amount to backing down in the face of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation.

“While the removal of our state-funded travel ban to these states does not protect Californians from potential harm,” Low said in a statement Thursday, “I am hopeful that the BRIDGE project will help change hearts and minds in states that have pursued and enacted anti-LGBTQ laws.”