BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 882 Page 1 Date of Hearing: May 11, 2011 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Felipe Fuentes, Chair AB 882 (Cook) - As Amended: April 25, 2011 Policy Committee: Vets Vote:9-0 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YES Reimbursable: Yes SUMMARY This bill: 1)Creates the California Veterans Services and Workforce Development Division within the Department of Veterans Affairs (CDVA) to coordinate and administer veterans' assistance programs. These provisions sunset Jan.1, 2016. a) Requires the division to coordinate with other state agencies that assist veterans to ensure that information about veterans' assistance programs and benefits is made available to all state agencies that serve veterans in the state. b) Transfers administrative control and responsibility for the Transitional Assistance Program (TAP) from EDD to the division. All EDD TAP administrative and support staff would be transferred to the division. 2)Creates a one-stop center pilot program in L.A., San Diego and San Francisco counties to improve collaboration between CDVA, EDD and county veterans service officers (CVSOs) to increase compensation and pension benefit claims for veterans, through the established one stop centers as a part of the Local Veteran Employment Representative program, as prescribed by the U.S. Department of Labor. Requires CDVA to enter into agreements with these counties to combine the resources and personnel of CDVA, CVSOs, and the EDD. FISCAL EFFECT AB 882 Page 2 1)The CDVA will incur one-time administrative costs, likely in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars, to establish and organize the new division and transition the specified programs and staff from EDD to the new division, and ongoing costs in the range of $150,000 to coordinate and collaborate with other state agencies providing veterans services. 2)EDD would likely incur one-time transition costs associated with the relocation of staff and programs to the CDVA. There are approximately 180 federally-funded positions at EDD involved in the impacted programs. COMMENTS 1)Rationale . The genesis for this bill is the success of the Texas model for providing veterans benefits. In 2005, the Texas veteran workforce program ranked 32nd in the nation in veteran employment and retention. The following year, legislation was enacted to transfer the program from the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) to the Texas Veterans Commission (TVC), which provided more focus on-site in the delivery of veterans' services. Today, Texas is considered to have one of the strongest veteran workforce and job training programs in the nation. By the end of 2007, Texas' veteran employment retention had risen from 32% to 86%--11th best among state programs. Also, Texas had increased the percentage of veterans receiving benefits to 16.1%. (Only 12.3% of California veterans receive benefits.) 2)Is the Texas Model the right fit for California ? The pilot project brings the EDD, the Department, and the CVSOs to the table to more effectively address veterans' needs. While this approach may ultimately prove successful to some degree, pilot projects take time, money and experience to implement - all particularly challenging in a time of increasing service demand and decreasing budgets. Should CDVA move toward a model in which it is more a service provider, rather than a service broker? 3)Related Legislation. a) AB 2143 (Gilmore), 2010) was similar to AB 882 and failed in the Senate. AB 882 Page 3 b) AB 557 (J.A. Perez), 2011, pending in this committee, creates an Interagency Council on Veteran Services and Programs, to bring state departments, federal entities, legislative representatives, local governments, and stakeholder organizations together to enhance veterans' services. c) AB 1569 (Committee on Veterans Affairs), 2010, was similar to AB 557 and failed in the Senate. Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081