Supervisors hear BLA, community calls for $5.8M to implement San Francisco language-access amendments

The Budget and Appropriations Committee on May 21 heard a report and community testimony on implementing the city’s 2024 language‑access ordinance amendments and the 2025 Language Access Compliance Summary Report, with the Budget and Legislative Analyst estimating roughly $5.8 million in first‑year costs and a total investment need of about $22.9 million across departments.

The hearing, chaired by Supervisor Connie Chan, opened with sponsor Supervisor Shamon Walton saying the amendments are meant to expand language access and “ensure that we continue to identify ways to support this effort, through funding, staffing, but we’re also advocacy, outside City Hall.” Walton added: “Language access is not just a legal obligation, it is a matter of equity, dignity, and public trust.”

The Budget and Legislative Analyst’s office presented a citywide review of how departments report language‑access costs and services. Fred Brusseau of the BLA said departments reported $15.1 million in language‑access spending in fiscal 2022–23, with telephonic interpretation a large component and a category labeled “other/non‑categorized” accounting for nearly half of reported costs. The BLA reported divergent figures for compensatory bilingual pay: departments reported $2.2 million to the Office of Civic Engagement and Immigrant Affairs (OSEA), while payroll records from the Department of Human Resources showed about $4.4 million.

Brusseau told the committee the 2024 ordinance amendments lower the certification threshold for required languages from 10,000 limited‑English‑proficient (LEP) residents to 6,000, which will make Vietnamese eligible for certification beginning Jan. 1, 2026, by current calculations. The BLA also reported 1,057 positions classified by DHR as having a language special condition and a 17% vacancy rate among those positions in 2022. The city also relies on certified bilingual employees (3,545 reported by DHR in 2022–23) and outside contractors; the BLA said the vendor contract pool had about $10 million in total multiyear value, averaging roughly $1.8 million per year over the five years ending 2023.

Office of Civic Engagement and Immigrant Affairs Director Jorge Rivas and Language Access Policy Manager Anna DeCarolis told the committee OSEA’s language unit currently has capacity in Cantonese, Mandarin, Spanish and Filipino but not in Vietnamese or other languages. DeCarolis said OSEA is developing a “know your rights” brochure and a first‑responder best‑practices plan but warned that additional staff and subject‑matter expertise will be required to meet the expanded complaint‑reporting and emergency‑response duties in the ordinance.

Community organizations that form the Language Access Network described repeated examples of gaps in real‑world service delivery, particularly during emergencies. Anisha Hingarani of Chinese for Affirmative Action and Manisha Wangara of African Advocacy Network described instances when interpreters were unavailable or unqualified during medical emergencies; speakers and multiple public commenters urged the committee to prioritize the BLA funding estimate. The Language Access Network asked the committee to prioritize $5.8 million for OSEA and departments and to maintain $900,000 over two years for the Language Access Network’s community work.

Public commenters included community‑based organizations and residents reporting missed interpretation during medical care, difficulty accessing vital documents, and mistranslated signage in public buildings. Several speakers cited the city’s lowered certification threshold and the prospect of certifying Vietnamese in 2026 as reasons to accelerate planning and budget commitments now.

Committee members praised community testimony and asked OSEA and the BLA to clarify counting methods and data discrepancies. Supervisor Cheyenne Chen and others raised concerns about mistranslated signage and whether departments were following the ordinance’s “vital documents” standard. OSEA staff said departments are responsible for budgeting, producing and vetting translated materials, and that OSEA’s role includes training, technical assistance and complaint follow‑up rather than direct enforcement.

Supervisor Walton moved — and Supervisor Chan seconded — to file the hearing. The committee voted 4–0 to file the hearing. The committee did not adopt binding budget allocations at the hearing; staff and supervisors indicated further follow‑up and requests for department budget presentations and DHR analysis on premium pay would be pursued.

The committee received eight BLA recommendations included in the April report, including: (1) consider the new funding needs identified by the BLA, (2) improve departmental accounting to reduce the “other” category in cost reports, (3) direct OSEA and DHR to reconcile discrepancies in bilingual‑pay and staff counts, (4) ask OSEA to prepare guidance for departments to implement a community‑focused approach, (5) consider a citywide bilingual registry to share staff across departments, (6) ask DHR to report on appropriate premium pay, and (7) encourage departments to migrate key pages to sf.gov to access human‑translation capabilities and (8) use human translation for frequently visited city pages.

The hearing record, presentations and public comments will inform follow‑up budget work during the city’s fiscal deliberations. OSEA and the BLA were asked to return with additional details on verification of departmental reporting, emergency‑response protocols, and recommendations on staffing and premium pay.