BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1931
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 9, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 1931 (Gorell) - As Amended: April 16, 2012
Policy Committee: Veterans
AffairsVote: 8-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill establishes the California Veterans Services and
Workforce Development Division within the Department of Veterans
Affairs (CDVA) to coordinate and administer veterans' assistance
programs. Specifically, this bill:
1)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.
2)Transfers administration of the Transitional Assistance Program
(TAP) and the Local Veterans' Employment Representatives
(LVER) from EDD to the division. All EDD TAP
administrative and support staff would be transferred to the
division. A plan for the transition is due May 1, 2013.
3)Requires the division to coordinate with staff from other state
agencies regarding providing
services to veterans.
4)Specifies that any costs associated with the transfer of
administrative responsibilities "shall use" the existing
resources of CDVA.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)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
AB 1931
Page 2
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.
2)Is the Texas Model the right fit for California ? While this
approach may ultimately prove successful to some degree,
administrative transitions 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)Prior Legislation .
a) AB 882 (Cook), 2011, was similar to this bill, but also
included four-year, three-county "one-stop center" pilot
projects in L.A., San Francisco and San Diego for the
purpose of enhancing collaboration between CDVA, EDD,
county veteran service officers, and local governments to
more effectively serve California veterans through the
established one-stop career centers. AB 882 passed off of
this committee's Suspense File with only the pilot project
provisions.
b) AB 2143 (Gilmore), 2010, was similar to this bill and
passed off of this committee's Suspense File as a study
bill.
AB 1931
Page 3
Analysis Prepared by : Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081