BILL ANALYSIS �
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