BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2253|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2253
Author: Ting (D)
Amended: 4/10/14 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE : 10-0, 6/24/14
AYES: Correa, Berryhill, Cannella, De Le�n, Galgiani,
Hernandez, Lieu, Padilla, Torres, Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Vacancy
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-0, 8/4/14
AYES: De Le�n, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 5/27/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Bilingual services: implementation plans
SOURCE : California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative
DIGEST : This bill makes the following substantive and
clarifying changes to the Dymally-Alatorre Bilingual Services
Act (Act).
ANALYSIS : Existing law, under the Act, requires each state
agency to conduct a survey, related to its bilingual services,
of each of its local offices every two years to determine
specified information, and to report results and any additional
information requested to the Department of Human Resources
(CalHR). The Act also requires each agency that serves a
substantial number of non-English-speaking people who comprise
CONTINUED
AB 2253
Page
2
5% or more of the people served to develop an implementation
plan, as specified, in every odd-numbered year, and to submit
the implementation plan to CalHR for its review. Additionally,
the Act authorizes CalHR, if it determines that a state agency
has not made reasonable progress toward complying with the Act,
to issue orders that it deems appropriate to effectuate the
purposes of the Act.
This bill makes the following substantive and clarifying changes
to the Act:
1.Stipulates that, by July 1, 2015, a state agency subject to
the Act must translate and make accessible on the homepage of
its Internet Web site, forms and processes for submitting
complaints of alleged violations of the Act. Requires that
the forms and processes be translated into all languages
spoken by a substantial number of non-English speaking people
served by the state agency; and requires that translated
copies of the forms must be printed and made available in the
statewide office and any local office of the state agency.
2.Requires, rather than authorizes, CalHR to issue orders that
it deems appropriate to effectuate the purposes of the Act if
a state agency has not made reasonable progress toward
reaching compliance.
3.Clarifies that provisions of the Act also apply to an agency's
"statewide" offices (existing law only specifies local
offices) which render services to the public.
4.Requires that an agency's biennial language survey also
contain a detailed description of "complaints regarding
language access received by the agency."
Background
The Act ensures that all residents, including those who are
limited-English-proficient (LEP), have equal access to public
services. The Act requires every state and local agency to have
a sufficient number of qualified bilingual staff and translated
written materials so that the LEP population they serve are able
to effectively access and communicate with government
Comments
CONTINUED
AB 2253
Page
3
The author's office notes that as California grows increasingly
diverse, the language access rights guaranteed by the Act are
more critical than ever. The author's office references audits
conducted by the California State Auditor in 1999 and 2010 that
revealed state agencies are not fulfilling their
responsibilities under the Act. Specifically, the Auditor's
report found that only 43 language access complaints were filed
over a period of four years. These numbers suggest that
language barriers in state government are so pervasive that LEP
individuals cannot even articulate to state agencies that a
problem exists. Additionally, the author's office cites the
most recent CalHR report which found that 77% of surveyed
agencies serve a "substantial number of non-English-speaking
people," and of those agencies, 80% reported having a bilingual
staffing deficiency.
The author's office states that although the Act implies that
state agencies should have a procedure to address language
barrier complaints, it does not set minimum standards to ensure
that the complaints process is effective and actually accessible
to the LEP populations it is intended to serve. The author's
office claims that the complaints process utilized by most state
agencies relies on translated posters developed by CalHR that
inform LEP individuals of their right to request services in
their native language by calling a toll-free telephone number.
However, this particular complaints process is only accessible
to LEP individuals who "walk into" a state agency office and not
those individuals who are increasingly interacting with
government agencies via the Internet. Additionally, this
process requires LEP individuals to register their complaint
with a different entity than the one from which they are
currently trying to seek services, creating an inefficient
two-step bureaucratic process.
The author's office points out that this bill requires state
agencies to make translated forms available to LEP individuals
so they can report any language barriers experienced while
accessing state services, both in-person and online, creating a
clear process for remedying such complaints. The author's
office emphasizes that this bill helps state agencies better
identify and resolve language barriers in state government that
prevent LEP individuals from gaining equal access to public
services.
CONTINUED
AB 2253
Page
4
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Unknown, one-time costs to state agencies that serve a
substantial number of LEP persons. Although cumulative
statewide costs are likely significant (potentially in the
hundreds of thousands of dollars), costs to each individual
agency are likely to be minor and absorbable. (General Fund,
various special funds)
Minor and absorbable costs to CalHR to issue compliance orders
to agencies that have identified deficiencies related to the
Act. This is currently a discretionary duty. (General Fund)
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/6/14)
California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative (source)
American Civil Liberties Union of California
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Los Angeles
Asian and Pacific Islander American Health Forum
Asian Health Services
Breast Cancer Action
California Environmental Justice Alliance
California Labor Federation
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
Californians for a Healthy and Green Economy
Chinese for Affirmative Action
Clean Water Action
Marin Asian Advocacy Project - Community Action Marin
Western Center on Law and Poverty
Worksafe
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Proponents note that California is a
state of great language diversity with over 15 million speaking
a language other than English at home. According to the U.S.
Census Bureau, over 10 million Californians speak Spanish - a
little under half of those speak English less than very well or
are LEP. Over one million people in California speak Chinese at
home, with over half of those speaking English less than very
well. Tagalog is spoken by about 800,000 Californians -
CONTINUED
AB 2253
Page
5
one-third of those individuals are LEP. Over a half million
people in California speak Vietnamese at home - over half of
those are LEP. In certain areas of California (e.g., the San
Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara region), Spanish speakers are
outnumbered by those who speak Asian and Pacific Island
languages. Proponents also estimate that up to 80% of nail
salon licensees are Vietnamese.
Proponents believe that this bill represents a small but
important step in improving language access for hundreds of
thousands of Californians who contribute to California's economy
and over all well-being.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 5/27/14
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier,
Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell,
Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden,
Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal,
Maienschein, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian,
Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Perea, John A. P�rez, V. Manuel P�rez,
Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner,
Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk,
Williams, Yamada, Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Donnelly, Mansoor, Patterson, Quirk-Silva,
Vacancy
MW:e 8/6/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED