Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Language Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors Hear Gaps and Proposals in City’s Language Access Implementation
Summary
City departments and community advocates told the Board’s Government Accountability & Oversight Committee that San Francisco’s Language Access Ordinance is broadly effective but needs stronger enforcement, better data collection, funding for quality translation/interpretation, and improved outreach to emerging language communities.
SAN FRANCISCO — City officials and community advocates said Wednesday that San Francisco’s Language Access Ordinance (LAO) has created a strong foundation for serving residents with limited English proficiency, but they urged the Board of Supervisors to strengthen enforcement, improve data collection, and fund higher‑quality interpretation and translation.
Chelsea Boyard, staff for Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer, opened the committee’s item noting that “San Francisco first passed the language access ordinance in 02/2001” and that the hearing was intended to begin a longer discussion about service gaps and improvements.
Adrianne Pond of the Office of Civic Engagement and Immigrant Affairs (OCEIA) told the committee the city’s law is “probably the strongest in the nation,” but said departments must do more to ensure “timely, accurate, and trustworthy information, especially during crisis, emergency, and public‑safety situations.” She recommended better quality control for interpretations and translations, new digital delivery modes, and dedicated funding so departments can meet demand.
Representatives from the San Francisco Language Access Network pressed for four priorities: mandatory certification and regular recertification for bilingual staff, culturally competent interpretation, systematic data collection (including modality and wait times), and an improved accountability process. Annette Wong of the Network urged the Board to “give [the ordinance] a little more teeth” through amendments and to authorize a study of LEP residents’ lived experiences to complement quantitative reporting.
Departmental presenters described a mix of progress and gaps. John Murray of the Human Services Agency said HSA serves roughly 200,000 people annually and has increased bilingual capacity through kiosks, interpreter contracts, and a new public website planned for June. Commander David Lazar for the San Francisco Police Department outlined training upgrades and remote video interpretation at stations and said SFPD is working to increase certification among bilingual officers; he summarized the department’s strategy with what he called the “4 T’s”: testing, training, technology and tracking.
The Department of Public Health credited centralized staffing and improved data with raising compliance and said it plans a community advisory board and full phone‑line and signage accessibility by 2018–2019. SFMTA, Rec & Park and the Rent Board described different operational approaches; Rec & Park acknowledged it had not yet completed required LAO policy and mandatory training and reported reliance on volunteers and continuing work to document Cantonese service interactions.
Several community members gave public comment, citing problems that persist in outreach for transit service changes and long‑wait experiences for domestic‑violence survivors who need interpretation. Committee members and agency staff agreed to follow up; the committee continued the item to the call of the chair for additional legislative fixes, data follow‑up and procedural improvements.
The hearing produced several specific next steps: departments committed to follow up on data inconsistencies flagged at the meeting, DEM/OCEIA will work with the board on improving notification and enforcement protocols, and the Language Access Network offered to collaborate on ordinance amendments and a study of lived experience.
