BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 1580
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 1580 (Yamada)
          As Amended  March 19, 2014
          Majority vote

           VETERANS AFFAIRS    7-2         APPROPRIATIONS      12-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Quirk-Silva, Medina,      |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra,         |
          |     |Brown, Eggman, Fox,       |     |Bradford,                 |
          |     |Muratsuchi, Salas         |     |Ian Calderon, Campos,     |
          |     |                          |     |Eggman, Gomez, Holden,    |
          |     |                          |     |Pan, Quirk,               |
          |     |                          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Weber      |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Ch�vez, Grove             |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Institutes review measures and controls on the  
          expenditure of Morale, Welfare, and Recreation funds.   
          Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Requires that for proposed expenditures of Morale, Welfare,  
            and Recreation Fund (MWR) moneys of more than $5,000, proposed  
            contracts of more than $25,000 per year, or proposed contracts  
            of more than $100,000, all of the following shall apply:

             a)   The administrator of the Veterans Home proposing an  
               expenditure shall submit the proposed expenditure or  
               contract to the secretary of the Department of Veterans  
               Affairs (CalVet) for approval. The secretary shall consider  
               the advisory opinion required in b) below and any other  
               relevant information when determining whether an  
               expenditure or contract will be approved.

             b)   The proposed expenditure or contract shall be reviewed  
               by legal counsel of the department, or another similarly  
               qualified reviewer designated by the secretary. The  
               reviewer shall issue an advisory opinion to the secretary  
               identifying those laws and regulations with which the  
               proposed expenditure or contract or execution of the  
               contract must comply, and any other relevant legal issues  
               that may arise with respect to compliance with those laws  
               and regulations.








                                                                  AB 1580
                                                                  Page  2



             c)   Prior to the execution of a proposed expenditure or  
               contract, the department shall provide written notification  
               in the form of a draft expenditure proposal to the  
               Veterans' Home Allied Council or to another body  
               representing the residents of the affected home or homes.  
               The draft expenditure proposal shall include, but is not  
               limited to, a description of the intent of the project that  
               is the subject of the proposed expenditure or contract,  
               estimated costs, and an approximate timeline of execution.  
               The Veterans' Home Allied Council or other body  
               representing residents of the affected home or homes shall  
               have the opportunity to respond to the draft expenditure  
               proposal and the department shall consider any responses  
               provided.

             d)   Upon the execution of the expenditure or contract, the  
               department shall provide written notification to the  
               Veterans' Home Allied Council or another body representing  
               residents of the affected home or homes. The notification  
               shall identify the purpose of the project, costs, and who  
               is the recipient or recipients of the moneys distributed  
               from the MWR.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, ongoing General Fund costs in the range of $150,000  
          for the equivalent of 1.5 personnel years to CalVet to review  
          MWR fund expenditures. 

           COMMENTS  :  The Morale Welfare and Recreation (MWR) fund was  
          established in 1999 by SB 281 (Chesbro). The Legislature  
          intended to provide veteran home administrators with an  
          additional funding tool to provide for the general welfare of  
          residents beyond their medical and housing needs. Each home  
          maintains an individual MWR. Monies are deposited into  
          individual funds through a variety of means including proceeds  
          generated from the Veterans' Home Exchange, revenue from  
          prisoner-of-war special license plates, funds from golf course  
          green fees and range ball fees, accrued interest in the account,  
          the recovered cost of care collected from residents' estates,  
          and any donations from the public. The amount of money in each  
          account varies from home to home, ranging from an account in  
          excess of $4 million at the largest home at Yountville, to an  
          account of $7,000 at the recently established West Los Angeles  








                                                                  AB 1580
                                                                  Page  3


          home. Home administrators, at the direction of the Secretary of  
          CalVet, have discretion over how monies within the fund are  
          spent. 

          An October 2013 California State Auditor's investigation report  
          entitled, Wastefulness, Failure to Comply With State Contracting  
          Requirements, and Inexcusable Neglect of Duty revealed that over  
          a two-year period from January 2010 to December 2011, the  
          Yountville Veterans Home administrator executed two contracts  
          using MWR funds without consulting CalVet executive office  
          officials, appropriate legal counsel, or residents of the Home. 

          These contracts included a zip line adventure park for use by  
          the public and residents of the home and a tavern that did not  
          comply with state leasing requirements. In the construction of  
          the adventure park, the contract included provisions which  
          leased over 200 acres of state land for $1 per year and involved  
          the clearing of untouched natural lands without a California  
          Environmental Quality Act review. Under the contract executed by  
          the administrator, the home would receive 10% of any net income  
          generated from operating the park after subtracting all  
          operating expenses including salaries with no revenue guaranteed  
          if revenues did not exceed expenses. Once the contract was  
          discovered by CalVet officials, it cost the state $228,612 to  
          extricate itself from the contract and to dismantle the nearly  
          completed zip line tour. When the administrator pursued the  
          second contract leasing the on-sight tavern, she failed to  
          initiate a process to solicit competitive bids, eventually  
          resulting in a contract by which the Veterans Home paid an  
          outside management company $75,000 per year to manage the  
          tavern. Included in the deal, MWR funds were used to cover all  
          start-up costs for the venture and any monthly expenses not  
          covered by sales for the first year of the contract. Only 25% of  
          the profits generated from the enterprise would be deposited  
          into the MWR fund after all other expenses were covered; however  
          there was no guarantee the venture would be profitable. In  
          exchange for being permitted to establish a business on state  
          property, the vendor was paid and subsidized with  
          state-controlled funds. When the terms of the contract were  
          discovered and terminated by CalVet officials a year and a half  
          later, the home had paid the vendor $424,307. 

          The report discovered both contracts violated state contracting  
          practices and little or no information had been shared between  








                                                                  AB 1580
                                                                  Page  4


          the administrator of the home and CalVet headquarters prior to  
          the execution of the contracts. Further, the Department of  
          General Services was not consulted in its role as the agency  
          overseeing state leasing requirements.  In total, $652,919 were  
          wasted in state-managed funds.

          The report highlighted several key deficiencies in the current  
          administration of MWR funds. Though the administrator is  
          authorized to use MWR funds with the approval of the Secretary  
          of CalVet, home administrators have historically been granted  
          sole authority over decision making regarding the use of the  
          fund. Further, each contract was executed with little or no  
          legal oversight, which presumably would have discovered both  
          contracts violated state law and required review by the  
          Department of General Services. Finally, residents of the home  
          were unaware of the two contracts being executed involving MWR  
          funds; only discovering the construction of the adventure park,  
          nominally built for their benefit, when helicopters were seen  
          flying overhead with construction material. 

          This bill implements certain recommendations of the October 2013  
          investigation by instituting controls, oversight, and resident  
          notification and input concerning the expenditure of MWR funds.   
          Also, as recommended by the investigation it strikes a balance  
          by permitting smaller expenditures to be encumbered by somewhat  
          less process so that small expenditures may be more quickly  
          made.


           Analysis Prepared by  :    John J. Spangler / V.A. / (916)  
          319-3550 


                                                                FN: 0003592