Board of Appeals keeps court‑reporter requirement, rejects move to rely solely on SFGTV captions

The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 5‑0 on Dec. 6 to retain Article 4 of its hearing rules and continue contracting for an official court reporter rather than relying solely on SFGTV video and captioning as the administrative record.

The board debated a proposed rule amendment that would let SFGTV video serve as the official administrative record, with parties able to order transcripts from video at their own expense. Deputy City Attorney Catherine Barnes told the board the code treats the CD/video as the administrative record but cautioned that a subsequent closed‑caption transcription would have to be verified to serve as an accurate transcript.

Several members of the public urged retention of a live reporter. "It is very important for people to have the confidence that if they can't get satisfaction here, they can move on to the next level," said Jeremy Paul, a private citizen and frequent appellant representative, urging the board to keep the court‑reporter requirement. Jack Shin, general manager of SFGTV, said captioners produce a near‑real‑time record and that many captioners are certified, but acknowledged limits on proper‑name accuracy and the need for a custom dictionary.

Commissioner Catherine Albright said she values the interaction a live reporter can have with witnesses to clear up unclear testimony, a function closed captioning cannot replicate. After discussion, Commissioner Michael Garcia moved to retain Article 4 and authorize a new contract for a court reporter. The motion passed unanimously.

The board directed staff to proceed with contracting and noted that the board's rules can be amended in the future with proper public notice. The immediate effect is that an official court reporter will continue to be engaged for Board of Appeals hearings while staff evaluates contract options and related captioning quality assurance.