BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS
JEFF DENHAM, CHAIRMAN
Bill No: AB 2784
Author: Assembly Veterans' Affairs Committee
Version: As amended May 28, 2010
Hearing Date: June 22, 2010
Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT OF BILL
California Veterans' Board
PROPOSED LAW
1. States several findings from the October 2009
Bureau of State Audit report concerning California
Department of Veterans Affairs (CDVA):
CDVA needs to improve its strategic planning
and better track how its goals are being met;
CDVA did not adequately assess veterans' needs
when constructing its strategic plan;
CDVA's strategic plan does not define how goals
will be met or assessed;
CDVA's Veterans' Services Division lacks goal
specifics and measurement of progress as well as not
aligning with the department's strategic plan; and
CDVA has not monitored procedures as suggested
in its strategic plan.
1. Makes the following legislative findings:
Women veterans, especially young women, are
at higher risk for developing mental health
conditions than male veterans;
Military Sexual Trauma (MST) is widespread;
Women veterans with MST are more prone to
develop additional mental health conditions;
Women are twice as likely as males to develop
post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), have longer
lasting symptoms than males, and are more likely to
have accompanying physical problems;
Women are experiencing an increasing rate of
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) due to combat; and
Depression is common among female veterans
and substance abuse is common among female veterans
who are depressed or have PTSD.
1. Expands the Veterans' Board from seven to nine
members.
2. Requires that two members of the board be appointed
from Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring
Freedom (OIF/OEF).
3. Adds mental health counseling to an aspect of
qualifications that can be considered for appointing a
member of the board.
4. Prohibits the Secretary of CDVA from making policy
recommendations without first briefing the veterans'
board.
5. Adds veterans services administered by other
agencies to the definition of program in Military and
Veterans Code (MVC) sections 84 and 700.
6. Encourages the governor to appoint a member with an
expertise in women's mental and physical health
issues.
EXISTING LAW AND BACKGROUND
1. In 1946, the Legislature created the Veterans'
Board to set the policies of CDVA.
2. Members of the board are required to be veterans.
3. The Veterans' Board is to set the policy of the
department according to MVC section 72. "The
California Veterans' Board shall determine the
policies for all operations of the department."
Page 2
4. The structure of the board within the department
allows for veterans with knowledge of veterans issues
to set policy rather than bureaucrats who may or may
not be as aware of issues affecting veterans.
5. Assembly Bill 2933 of 2000 (Assembly Veterans
Affairs Committee) created MVC 66.5 and required that
one of the seats on the board was to be filled by an
individual with expertise in real estate mortgages and
another seat to be filled by an individual with
expertise in senior health care.
6. Senate Bill 1858 of 2002 (Knight) amended MVC 66.5
and required one seat to be filled by an individual
with an accounting or auditing background.
7. In 2004, the governor attempted to consolidate
power within the executive branch by abolishing the
Veterans Board as part of the California Performance
Review (CPR) proposal. The proposal would have
eliminated much of the State Senate's oversight
through its confirmation of appointees.
8. This committee authored SB 1387 this year to add
the requirement that one board member have an
expertise in hospital administration given that CDVA
will soon administer an eight-home system. SB 1387
passed the Senate on Consent and is currently in
Assembly Appropriations Committee.
COMMENT
1. This bill has a drafting error. See recommended
clean up amendment below.
2. If any more requirements are added beyond SB 1387
(Senate Veterans) for appointments to the Veterans'
Board, then the board needs to be expanded, which this
bill does.
3. This bill requires two seats for OIF/OEF veterans,
which raises the question as to why if specific wars
Page 3
are to be represented on the board, why would only the
most recent war be represented?
4. Even with the expansion of the board, if this bill
is signed then over half the seats on the board would
have some sort of specific requirement to them.
Current MVC section 66.5 requires an expert in
mortgages, an expert in long-term care, and an expert
in accounting for a total of three out of seven seats.
This bill requires two seats for OIF/OEF veterans as
well as an expert in women's issues; so, although the
board is being expanded, there will be fewer at-large
seats available for the general interest of veterans
to be represented.
If SB 1387 (Senate Veterans') is signed as well, then
only two at-large seats would exist.
5. The obvious solution given comments #2 and #3 in
this analysis seems to be to make the board even
larger than nine members except that there already
seems to be a problem finding enough appointees to
fill all of the seats.
6. What this bill is intending to do is to equip the
board not just to enact general policy but also
prepare it to meet needs on future specific policy
issues. However, some of the amendments may make the
interest of new veterans compete with the interest of
older veterans, rather than representing both.
The section of this bill that would add mental health
counseling as a possible criterion for appointment is
written into the code section that now requires
expertise in "geriatrics, gerontology, or long-term
care." Most of those veterans that need mental health
counseling are those returning with PTSD or TBI.
Hence, appointing a mental health counselor to that
seat could be at the cost of WWII or Korea veterans
who need expertise in those areas for older veterans.
In a similar fashion, the vast majority of those
Page 4
female veterans who will suffer from PTSD, TBI, and
MST are young veterans by the simple fact that the
prevalence of women in uniform and especially the use
of women in combat really did not begin to happen
until the last 20 years.
The result of having two OIF/OEF veterans, an expert
in female veteran issues, AND an expert in mental
health issues creates the likelihood that the board
would be stacked to the point that the issues of older
veterans may be ignored.
Given that what is needed on the board is expertise on
issues facing veterans and that many of the upcoming
issues, not coincidentally, affect OIF/OEF veterans,
those seats should be combined so as to prevent quota
seats on the board. Adding two WWII veterans, two
Korea veterans, two Vietnam Veterans, two Desert
Shield Veterans could then create the need to expand
the board to at least 17 members, not including
raising questions as to why not include veterans of
Kosovo, Somalia, and any other action in which the
United States involves itself.
The Chairman would like to point out that the
committee may wish to consider having one of the seats
filled by either an OIF/OEF veteran although it would
be better to not have a war specific reference on the
board.
7. AMENDMENTS-
CLEAN UP AMENDMENT- Presently this bill states that
these provisions will become active after September
27, 2002. It should read September 27, 2012.
RECOMMENDED AMENDMENT- Make the new mental health
criterion its own seat on the board.
RECOMMENDED AMENDMENT- Remove war specific references
to appointments lest the precedent be set for conflict
quotas on the board.
Page 5
Page 6
PRIOR ACTIONS
Assembly Veterans' Affairs 9-0
Assembly Appropriations 17-0
Assembly Floor 76-0
SUPPORT
American Legion, Department of California
AMVETS, Department of California
Vietnam Veterans of America, California State Council
OPPOSE
None received
Page 7