BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin de Le�n, Chair
AB 235 (Gatto) - State Claims.
Amended: April 29, 2013 Policy Vote: N/A
Urgency: Yes Mandate: No
Hearing Date: June 24, 2013
Consultant: Mark McKenzie
This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File. Pursuant to the committee's rules, the Suspense
File rule does not apply to the provisions of this bill as
claims are considered valid obligations of the state.
Additionally, claims may have time sensitivity.
Bill Summary: AB 235, an urgency measure, would appropriate
$1,080,580.70 from specified funds to the California Victim
Compensation and Government Claims Board (board) for the payment
of 343 state claims.
Fiscal Impact: General Fund appropriation of $914,057.76 to pay
317 claims, and appropriations totaling $166,522.94 from various
funds to pay 26 claims as follows:
$4,038.64 from the Estate Tax Fund (0085) to pay one claim.
$1,297.36 from the Continuing Care Provider Fund (0163) to
pay one claim.
$122,833.00 from the Restitution Fund (0214) to pay one
claim.
$201.48 from the California Water Resources Development
Bond Fund (0502) to pay one claim.
$1,622.23 from the Unclaimed Property Fund (0970) to pay
two claims.
$1,610.08 from the Motor Vehicle Account (0044) to pay nine
claims.
$637.33 from the CSU Trust Fund (0948) to pay one claim.
$34,945.04 from the Employment Development Contingent Fund
(0185) to pay eight claims.
$268.78 from the Service Revolving Fund (0666) to pay one
claim.
$69.00 from the Public Employees' Healthcare Fund (0822) to
pay one claim.
Background: The State Board of Control was established in 1945.
AB 235 (Gatto)
Page 1
It was revised and renamed the Victim Compensation and
Government Claims Board by Chapter 1016/2000 (AB 2491, Jackson).
Government Code 13928 requires the board to ensure that all
claims that have been approved by the board, and for which no
legally available appropriation exists, are submitted for
legislative approval at least twice during each calendar year.
In general, the board will approve claims in November and
February. Those claims are reported to the chairs of the
Appropriations Committees who introduce bills appropriating
General Funds and special funds to pay the claims. These bills
may appropriate funds in amounts to the penny for tens to
hundreds of claims. Government Code 906 provides for the
payment of interest on claims approved by the board for which an
appropriation has been made beginning 30 days after the
effective date of the law by which the appropriation is enacted.
The re-issuance of stale-dated warrants is the most prevalent
claim approved by the board. For stale-dated warrants, the
Controller must confirm that (1) the check was not cashed and
has not been issued and (2) more than three years have elapsed
since the check was issued and the monies have reverted to the
General Fund or to the relevant special fund. For these
warrants an appropriation is needed to reissue the payment.
This category also may include state treasury bonds that have
not been redeemed within ten years of their maturity date (there
are no such claims in this bill), but the majority of warrants
are payroll or tax refund checks.
Related Legislation: SB 369 (De Le�n), a spot bill that is
currently in the Senate Rules Committee, will be the vehicle for
the second batch of claims, which are being reviewed by the
Department of Finance for approval of funding sources.
Staff Comments: This bill appropriates approximately $1.1
million from the General Fund and various other funds to pay 343
claims approved by the board, 338 of which are for reissuing
stale-dated warrants. These expired checks range in payment
amount from $2 to $86,607; the average payment amount is
$2,541.79.
In addition to the stale-dated warrants, the bill includes
payment for the following five claims:
$95,056.49 for a contract claim to pay State Controller
legal services in excess of the original contracted amount.
AB 235 (Gatto)
Page 2
The legal services were conducted at the direction of the
State Controller under an amended contract. The Department
of General Services did not approve the contract changes,
but the legal services had already been performed and were
deemed critical.
$122,833.00 for a contract claim related to the
California Emergency Management Agency for grand funding
awarded for gang intervention work. The grant
appropriation liquidation period expired due to procedural
problems that were eventually resolved.
$1,297.36 to reimburse a Department of Social Services
employee for travel expenses. The original forms to
process the reimbursement were not considered to be filed
on time because they were lost in an office move.
$1,567.00 to reissue an unclaimed property payment that
was mistakenly paid by the State Controller to an
individual with the same name as the eligible claimant.
The funds were uncollectable from the original payee, who
is now indigent.
$700.80 for a tort claim to reimburse a Board of
Equalization employee's travel expenses, which were
approved but filed late by the employee.