********
This text is being provided in a rough draft format.  Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.
********  7/2/20.

SARAH SAYEED:  We can wait a few more minutes.
Are the people who are offering comment here? 
FRANCIS URROZ:  Yes.
	SARAH SAYEED:  We're going to wait one more minute. I'm going to call to order the Civic Engagement Commission public hearing focused on establishing training that interpreter should receive before they offer language assistance services on Election Day. I'd like to welcome everyone who is on today in the meeting. Thank you so much for joining us. I want to start off with a couple of technical assistance instructions for everyone. To the CEC commissioners, as we've done in the past, audio for you will be enabled during the meeting. However we ask during the meeting if you could just mute yourself if you're not speaking to avoid background noise. 
And you can either unmute yourself, or raise your hand next to your name in the participant list on the menu control bar if you'd like to respond or make a comment. To all other participants, you are muted upon entry and we will be enabling audio for people during the public comment period of this hearing. Which should begin once we've had a chance to review ‑‑ provide an overview of the rule that we'll be discussing today. 
And we will be calling on the participants in the order that they registered for public comment. And once all the registered participants have offered their comment we'll then open the floor for additional participants who didn't previously register but would like to offer comment today. You are encouraged to use the chat option to indicate if you'd like to offer testimony and/or you can also click on the raise hand icon next to your name in the participant list. If you are joining this meeting by phone today, and don't have access to a computer monitor you can also text your name and affiliation to 646‑763‑2189. Again that number is 646‑763‑2189. If you'd like to offer comment. 
	The meeting host will then enable the audio and call the participant by name to offer the public comment. Again it will be in order that the text was received. You can also enable closed captioning by selecting more options, which is the icon with the ellipses, the three dots. And you can click that to see an option for closed captioning. 
	To begin, and start us off I'd like to ask the Commissioners to please state their name and briefly introduce themselves. I guess I'm going to just say the order in which I think you can speak because I'll just ‑‑ that will make it easier for you. 
	Donna, Annetta, Mark, Murad, if I am missing anyone, please go ahead. Donna, would you like to start us off. Amy, I'm sorry. 
DONNA GILL:  Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Donna Gill. The Commissioner from central Harlem. Thank you.  
SARAH SAYEED:  Amy, would you like to go? 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  Amy Breedlove, Commissioner from Brooklyn. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Murad. 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  Good afternoon, everyone. Commissioner from Brooklyn as well. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Annetta? 
ANNETTA SEECHERRAN:  Good afternoon. Annetta Seecherran, Commissioner from Queens and Executive Director of Chiia. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Mark? I think you're still on mute. Mark? I'm not sure what happened there. Mark, if you can hear us, we'd love to have you introduce yourself. Am I missing any other commissioners who are on the call? If you'd like to introduce yourself. Okay. 
Hopefully we can connect with Mark and if anyone else comes on a little later we can get them to introduce themselves for the record. My name is Sarah Sayeed and I'm one of the commissioners who make up the Civic Engagement Commission and I'm also the chair and the Director. Our main purpose here today is to hear from members of the public about the Civic Engagement Commission proposed rule for establishing minimum standards for individuals who have been providing language assistance services in the CEC's poll site interpretation program. The poll site language assistance program on Election Day. If you recall, we are charter mandated to begin providing poll site language assistance in November 2020. 
And I wanted to just begin sort of with a very basic overview about rules because I did it also just to sort of ground myself as to what we were doing here today and why it's important to do what we're doing today. I think a lot of people think about city rules and regulations, and maybe don't understand them and also meetings like this might end up being sort of uninteresting to the public. Maybe even boring. So I wanted to just explain why I think we're here today, and also possibly to help people who might not have attended a space like this. 
So a rule is a type of law that is proposed and adopted by a city agency and very specific to the work of the agency. It defines how the agency will implement relevant laws when conducting its programs. And it's not applicable to other agencies. You need to particular agency making the rule. What makes a rule is there's actually a specific process agencies have to follow to create or amend the rule under the city administrative procedure act. The rulemaking process takes a minimum of 60 days and during that time agencies are asked to provide New Yorkers with an opportunity to review and comment on the proposed rule. 
This is different from a law which also goes through a public hearing process as everyone knows. But that is initiated as a bill sponsored by legislator or a group of legislators and voted on in the city council and signed off by the Mayor. City agencies make all kinds of rules as you all know and these impact the public. Some of the most common rules we can think of are rules about speed limits, stopping, standing, garbage collection, noise rules, fire work rules, more relevant to the moment we're in. And since these rules impact residents it's really important that we allow for a democratic process that allows the public to review the rules and provide feedback before they're finalized. And if we didn't have this process, city agencies would all be risking making rules that don't help the public and may even make things more difficult and we may not be able to abide by legal guidelines. 
So rules are here to establish a common standard. And they are meant to make life more predictable. And to promote coexistence. Rules are also related to regulations which are enforceable because they define exactly what's expected. And I bet that there are people on this call who have been through this process before. And if any of the other commissioners want to chime in here at this point about rules, regulations, laws, I open the floor for you to do that. Does anyone want to add anything to what I've said about the significance of today? 
So today's hearing is about the specific rule that CEC will follow when it provides language assistance services at poll sites. This rule does two things. We're going to get into more. It sets a minimum standard for interpreters to provide services and sets a requirement for what type of training the interpreter should receive before they provide these services. Given the commission will providing interpretation services in a variety of languages, and that we're going to be working alongside the Board of Elections to provide voluntary services, we have to set out guidelines that comply with laws related to providing services during elections. Including laws such as what are the hours of voting, when poll sites open and close, expected conduct, to protect voter privacy, prevent electioneering. This rule we're talking about today went through a process of being drafted and internally reviewed by the city Law Department. The draft was discussed and voted on at the last meeting on May 20 as everyone remembers who was here before. We posted for public comment 30 days before the public hearing today. And once all of the testimony is taken in today and the comments that were sent in, we may then modify the rule based on this feedback and as necessary draft a final version. 
And once that version is finalized a copy is posted onto NYC rules, published in the city record and submitted to city council. And the rule will take effect 30 days after the final version is published. 
So we're going to prepare now to hear from our Gagan Kaur, the commission advice or on community boards to provide an overview for the methodology for the poll site interpretation program and the rule for interpreter training and qualification. After that we will begin the comment period. Each commenter will speak up to three minutes. And we'll be running a timer to help us keep on track. Once the commenter finishes the Commissioners will have the floor to ask clarifying questions, and as we did in the previous public hearing, let's stick to between two to three clarifying questions. And we will hold comments on the comments until the end after everyone has submitted their testimony. And if the Commissioners don't have any questions, I'll also see if any of the staff wants to ask questions on the comments. 
Does anyone have any question on the procedure that we're following today? 
Mark, would you like to introduce yourself? 
MARK DILLER:  Sure. Good afternoon, my name is Mark Diller. Manhattan borough representative to the Civic Engagement Commission. Sorry to be joining you a little bit late. Thank you. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Thank you. Just making sure there are no other Commissioners who joined us. I think we're okay. 
So I am going to now turn it over gagan. I'll mute myself. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you. I hope you're all safe and well. We thought it might be helpful to briefly frame the methodology that will inform our programming in November before speaking to the proposed rules under the methodology. A lot of you may already be familiar with the methodology. I know many of you were at our public hearing in February so we'll be sharing more of the top line. 
The CEC is charged under chapter 76 of the city charter with establishing a poll site language assistance program to provide interpreters at poll sites throughout New York City for the purpose of facilitating participation by voters with limited English proficiency. Elections held in the city starting November 2020. The program is supplemental to the language services provided by the New York City Board of Elections mandated under the voting rights act. The CEC was charged with publishing the preliminary methodology by January first, receiving comments for 30 days, from the public, and revising and publishing the final methodology by April 31st located on our website. The methodology determines how they're determined for the poll site language assistance program. As I mentioned this methodology will be in effect starting with the November general election. And for the November 2020 election the CEC will provide services in the ten most commonly spoken languages. Plus Yiddish and Italian. The languages are Arabic, Bengali, Chinese which includes Cantonese, Mandarin, French, Haitian Creole, Polish, Russian, Urdu, Yiddish. As I mentioned this program is supplemental to the language provided by the Board of Elections. CEC may not provide languages in counties already provided assistance. But does not in Richmond County and does not in Manhattan County. So CEC may provide services in Bengali in Staten Island and Manhattan but not in Queens. Accessible to community members prior to hearings we like to hold briefing calls or conversations with community members to run through the content. To that point, the CEC convened a stakeholder round table on June 18th focused on training materials, developed by the Mayor's office of immigrant affairs and Mayor's office of operations which are the two agencies as you may recall that ran the pilot interpretation program prior to the CEC. 
All these materials will be revised prior to utilization and interpreters for the November 2020 election.  The purpose of the round table was to share not only training content but also to garner community feedback, provide overview on CEC's proposed rule on minimum standards and also to discuss today's hearing.  
The CBOs in attendance during that round table are Arab American association of New York, council of people's organization, Muslim community network, care, center for African women, Chinese American planning council and Hispanic federation. 
We received so many thoughtful suggestions during the round table. And shared all of our materials with the community‑based organizations to provide them with additional time to sit with the actual training content and circle back to the CEC with thoughts and considerations later on as they study content. The CEC also convened the language assistance advisory committee on June 24th. As many of our black members also part of community‑based organizations have deep ties with the community they serve. So during that meeting the members were made privy to the the training content and we also reviewed the proposed rule and created space for discussion and also to garner further feedback. 
And I just wanted to note that if commissioners are interested in viewing the content or the conversation that took place during the stakeholder round table we did record that meeting. If folks are interested we can share that with you all as well. 
I also want to acknowledge the great comments and questions that the commissioners raised at the last meeting. Some of those comments included more clarification on the root of certain words or how the CEC will be utilizing them. Language that came up was such as electioneering, defining professionalism, defining how cultural context fits into the work that we're trying to do. Commissioners also raised the recommendation to include language around respect in the rule, and also a clarifying question that we received both from the commissioners and also community partners as well around screening interpreters to ensure they are ‑‑ they can speak both English and the target language to be served. 
I wanted to provide this brief overview of the methodology that will govern our program, and also the work CEC is doing with community partners in a brief mention of our conversation ‑‑ our last conversation with the commissioners on the proposed rule to allow folks who may not have been present in the early process of this discussion and what has been discussed and done to date. 
Now getting into the actual rule itself, I'm going to share my screen. I'm looking over here because I'm using a monitor, just to let you know. 
Give me one second. 
Now I'm going to ask you the annoying question can you see my PowerPoint and screen? Thumbs up? Thank you so much. The only annoying thing is I cannot ‑‑ oh, actually you can see this. Sorry, give me one second. 
Do you also see the slides on the side? But you can still see the full slide? 
>> Yes. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Perfect. 
>> If you put the ‑‑ if you click on the thing that says set up show I think you'll probably get full screen out of that if you want. 
GAGAN KAUR:  But is it legible the way it is? 
MARK DILLER:  To me, sure. 
SARAH SAYEED:  It could get tougher with the next slides. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Very true. It's overwhelming my computer to go into the full screen. I'm sorry. I need to get a new computer. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Just do start slide show. 
GAGAN KAUR:  When I do that it overwhelms my computer. 
>> We can get started. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Just proceed. 
>> You can also zoom into the slide if it gets a little bit harder to read. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Perfect. The commissioners are always so kind and patient and go through these presentations often. Starting with the proposed rule, the commission under the poll site language assistance program is charged with promulgating rules that set minimum requirements around standards and training for individuals who provide assistance to voters under the program. The rule has four sections. The first and lengthier piece of the rule is on standards of conduct interpreters must comply with. The interpreters must comply with the following standard, with all lawful orders from the staff of the Board of Elections which includes but not limited to making an oath or signing an affirmation with the New York State election law. 
Interpreters may not engage in electioneering in the polling place or within 100 feet of the polling place. They may not directly or indirectly reveal to the person any particular name or candidate or ballot voted or by voter and they must comply with all applicable laws including article 8 and 17 of the New York State election law. 
Interpreters must also comply with the following ethical standards set forth by ADAPTed from the national council on health care interpreter certification's code of ethics which include confidentiality. Interpreters will regard all information obtained during the performance of the professional duties as confidential. Impartiality. The interpreter will perform their duties in an impartial way refraining from advising, counseling. Accuracy. The interpreter will strive to relay all information accurately in the performance of their professional duties. Taking into consideration cultural context. Professionalism. The interpreter will at all times act in a professional and ethical manner maintaining the boundaries of the goal and the involvement. 
The next portion of the rule goes into the minimum qualifications. The commission shall ensure that all interpreters have written and spoken fluency in English and the language to be served. 
The next piece is on training requirements. The commission shall ensure that all interpreters receive at least one training prior to each election event and at minimum the training must include ethical guidance for interpreters that will include the standards of conduct set forth in subdivision A of this section. The reason this is really important is it ensures the code of conduct set forth in section A which is not engaging in electioneering ‑‑ the confidentiality and impartiality, and accuracy, professionalism, all must be included and expanded upon within the training at the most minimum level. All the pieces outlined prior must be included within the training. This allows the CEC to expand and define all of this terminology more specifically as it relates to the program itself. 
The training must also include a process for tracking the number of voters the interpreter served and a protocol for collecting and reporting public complaints regarding the program. 
The second piece the protocol for collecting and reporting public complaints is very unique to the CEC's program and did not exist within the pilot program prior. 
The last piece of the rule expresses that if the commission engages in partnership to provide assistance to voters outside of polling places including but not limited to absentee voters such services must substantially comply with the provisions of this chapter. Given the current public health situation, and changes that may occur in the elections over the coming years ensures that even with changing programs the interpreters must still comply with the provisions set forth in this proposed rule. 
We just reviewed the overview and methodology of the brief presentation on the proposed rule. I now pass it back to Dr. Sayeed. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Thank you. We're going to now open the floor for testimony. As I mentioned before we're going to call on and enable audio for participants who signed up to offer testimony prior to this meeting. In the order that we received those requests. And then also if you haven't signed up, you can again as a reminder click on the participant icon found on the menu control bar. And when you see ‑‑ when you click on it you'll see your name on the right side of this screen. And you will see a raise hand icon next to your name. You can click that raise hand icon, and you can send a chat message with your name and affiliation to sign up. And we'll also enable audio for you once you sign up to offer your comment. Again I'm going to remind ‑‑ I don't know if we have anyone here ‑‑ I can't tell ‑‑ I don't think anyone is on the phone. But just in case it's not on my screen, you can text your name and affiliation to 646‑763‑2189. If you'd like to offer public comment and you're on the phone and the meeting host will enable audio for you once we are at your name. 
So I believe you have the names of people who signed up for comment today, Gagan. We'll have you call on each person. Each person will have three minutes. I'll run the timer on my phone. Once that person is done, we will see if anyone has questions. Or any of the commissioners have questions. Then we'll go to the next person. 
Who is next? 
GAGAN KAUR:  The first person will testify, the commissioners will then have opportunity to ask one or two clarifying questions. The first person that is offering testimony today is Tousif Ahsan from New York public interest research group, NYPIRG. 
>> Can everyone hear me? Awesome. I'll just go ahead and begin. Good afternoon. My name is Tousif Ahsan, civic engagement coordinator for the New York public interest research group. We're a nonpartisan not for profit research and advocacy organization. We work on the issues of consumer protection, environmental preservation, health care, higher education, and governmental reforms. We appreciate this opportunity to share our views on the rule for poll site interpreters and training content. In such a diverse city the importance of adequate and well trained translaters cannot be over stated. New York City has been plagued by systemic problems with the administration of elections and within our state election law. In their wisdom city voters created the Civic Engagement Commission, your mandate for enhanced translation services recognizes the limited and often inadequate job the Board of Elections has done providing services. The board has even fought against providing services. Even during the pandemic we're heartened you're moving forward. We wish you success. Additional thoughts on training practices. One, to underscore the importance of nonpartisanship and guard against unintended influences we believe a new section should be added which states do not directly or indirectly reveal to any person to any candidate, party, ticket, or ballot voted for by the voters they assist. Two, public access to information about translation services and experiences on election days is important when rolling out a new program. Regarding point 6C, 3, a protocol for collecting public complaints regarding the program. We call on the commission to compile and release complaint data collected by translaters and other facets of their work both contemporaneously to share with the various city and state ‑‑ no later than one month after the election. Three, to protect translaters from misidentification and provide visual cues for voters in need of service. We suggest the inclusion of an additional section, perhaps after section 6 which states shall conspicuously display identification provided by the commission while performing their duties. 
And on the subject of translater training, the proposed rule requires that the commission provide at least one training for such individuals prior to each election event. And establishes a minimum requirements for the content of the Commissioner training. While it does not seem the specifics of the training are meant to be covered in this set of rules it is still important for the commission. We call on the commission to be accessible for one the trainings should cover all aspects of the board's elections. Translater program or publicly explain why they're leaving certain elements out. The commission provided trainings should also cover all voter rights at poll sites not just fundamental operations. Translaters should also be well trained on deescalation strategies. Finally we urge to begin to implementation of the voter program during the likely implementation of the pandemic for Election Day. Be in consultation with the civic community, alerting them to CEC translation services via phone, text, social media through the absentee ballot process, early voting and Election Day itself and we look forward to continuing this conversation throughout the rulemaking process and the creation of training materials. Thank you for your opportunity to testify. 
SARAH SAYEED:  So much for that. I just want to make sure that everyone who is submitting comment today that we have a written or electronic version of whatever you are sharing with us. It would be really helpful for us. I'm going to turn to the commissioners to see if you have any clarifying questions. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  One question. You did say about getting feedback ‑‑ I think it was within 60 days after the election of any issues with the interpreters. Did I hear that correctly? 
>> Tousif Ahsan:  Give me one moment. I'm going to look to see if that's the figure that we suggested. 
MARK DILLER:  It had to do with complaint data, right? 
>> Correct. We call on the commission to compile complaint data ‑‑ no later than one month. That was our recommendation. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  Okay. And is there anything else in there that you're asking then for a process by which that complaint data results in some actions? 
>> Tousif Ahsan:  That's not part of our testimony but if that's something you'd like to discuss with us we'd be happy to have that conversation. Right now I just don't want to comment on that because it's not part of the conversation that we've been having so far. Right now we're just saying that there should be a mechanism by which the complaint data is collected and made available. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  Okay. Thank you. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Mark, you had a question? 
MARK DILLER:  Yeah. Thanks. It was clear that Mr. Ahsan was reading from something and I'm just hoping that that has been submitted to you, and that to the extent necessary that it be shared with us before any final rulemaking is done because it sounds like there were a couple of good ideas in there but I would want to actually read them side by side with the actual text of the proposed rule. 
>> It's common procedure for us to send a written testimony ahead of the verbal testimonies that we give. You should have that. But if you don't I could go ahead and send it to you after this. 
MARK DILLER:  I'll rely on our wonderful staff to take that up. If you submit it to them then we're all set. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you so much, Tousif. Really appreciate your testimony. I'm also going to share a timer on screen just so folks can see. 
SARAH SAYEED:  I was wondering if I should hold my phone up like this but you probably wouldn't be able to see. Trying to figure out, we have to figure out that piece of it. Are there ‑‑ do any of the other commissioners have any clarifying questions? 
DONNA GILL:  I had a question. The visual cues ‑‑ what do you propose as a visual cue? A badge? A sign? Something? What are your thoughts on that? For the interpreters. 
>> I don't think that I have any examples to give you right now. If you want to ‑‑ I can definitely follow up with the commission to provide some examples. I wasn't part of those conversations so I actually don't know what examples of visual clues that we'd suggest. 
DONNA GILL:  Thank you. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you, Donna and Tousif. I'm now going to invite the next speaker to offer testimony. I invite Katarzyna Hoerner, a professional interpreter to join us and offer testimony. When you're ready I'll start the timer. 
>> Good afternoon. Can you hear me? 
>> Yes. Loud and clear. 
>> Okay. My name is Katarzyna Hoerner, and I'm a language related services professional. I'm a certified translater by the American translaters association. Certified health care interpreter by certification (inaudible) interpreters and a licensed community interpreter trainer. I have read and analyzed the proposed rule on setting minimal standards and training requirements for poll site interpreters. And as an active interpreter I would say that this is exactly what I would expect. I am glad that such issues as confidentiality and voter autonomy have been included. And the prospective interpreters' fluency in English and languages ‑‑ and other than English languages that they'd serve will be tested. And also because there is a big difference between being just bilingual and being a professional interpreter, I'm also glad that the appropriate training will be provided to the interpreters, which is crucial in this situation. 
Finally, in terms of recruiting for interpreters, I would like to suggest that reaching out to those interpreters who are already active in such fields as legal and medical interpreting, could be the most beneficial method since most of them have been already trained and certified in some way which would make the training process much easier and shorter for everyone. 
So thank you so much. Thank you for the ability to testify today. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you so much, Katarzyna. 
>> Thank you. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Now commissioners, if you have any clarifying questions. Thank you so much. We really appreciate your testimony. Like we said earlier at your earliest convenience if you could send us a written version of this testimony so we can share it with our commissioners as well. 
>> Will do. Thank you. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you so much. Now I'm going to invite the next speaker to offer testimony. Inviting Ali Kaba from Muslim community network. Just like before, I will share the timer. On screen. Whenever you're ready, Ali. 
>> Do we have Ali Kaba joining us right now? Are you on the line? 
>> Can you hear me? Just give me a second. I'm sorry. Can you hear me? 
GAGAN KAUR:  Absolutely. You're clear. 
>> Thank you for allowing ‑‑ sorry. Thank you for allowing the Muslim community network to testify today. I am the census Captain of the MCN. One of the goals is to develop the capacity of Muslim New Yorkers to fully participate in the social ‑‑ of New York City. We have been achieving this through my NYC youth program diversity education and community engagement. The census work is part of our community engagement, we realize the Muslim community is considered one of the hardest reaching communities in America. Limited English proficiency, lack of trust of misinformation in the census. As a result we host a virtual forum and teach about the census in 8 different languages, which are Bengali, urdu, French, English ‑‑ and we're able to reach out to the community and stand up to be counted, a total of 26,000 engagement. This will have impact if we didn't engage in language access serving our community. Same way as we are ‑‑ having a new proposal issued by the New York City engagement commission would be a great resource to share with our community. That is important because many American Muslims are fluent in other languages besides English, and speaking those languages more than 50 percent of the time in their daily life. Also the religious landscape in ‑‑ it's a growing population. Makes up 8 to 9 percent of New York City proper which is nearly 800,000 people. 
This will encourage the work on ‑‑ the alienated New Yorker Muslim ‑‑ good for a representative democracy like ours. One recommendation we'd like to put forward would be to lessen the minimum qualifications for the interpreters, the often forgotten don't have their own ‑‑ many others. Having these ‑‑ having the interpreters at the polling site also encourages the community to feel included. It will make it much easier and such should be adopted. 

GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you so much. Thank you. Really appreciate your testimony. Do commissioners have any clarifying questions for Ali? 
ANNETTA SEECHERRAN:  I just wanted to hear a little bit more specifics around the qualifications that's being, if any, that is being recommended. What I heard was that there's a request to lessen the qualifications. Do you have any thoughts of what specific qualifications you would consider to be adequate? 
>> What I was thinking was that ‑‑ sorry about the noise here ‑‑ what I was thinking as I read on the proposal, I was thinking that the speaker, the interpreter must possess qualifications in both written and spoken of that language. I think that often sometimes people may often be ‑‑ there may be influences (inaudible).
One example is predominantly spoken languages of the Muslim American community but does not have a writing system. Making a requirement such as a strong writing system ‑‑ can you hear me? Can you guys hear me? 
>> Yes. Thank you. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you, Ali. 
>> I didn't finish my talk. Did you hear what I said? 
>> Yes, we heard you. If you're not finished, please continue. 
>> I was just saying that the minimum qualifications includes the often forgotten (inaudible). 
I think that would definitely hinder (inaudible) translated at the poll site. Often they are spoken but do not have a writing system. I don't know if I'm being understood. 
GAGAN KAUR:  You're being understood. Thank you, Ali. Do commissioners have additional questions for Ali? Thank you so much, Ali. Just as we requested from previous folks if you could at your earliest convenience send us over a written copy of your testimony so we can share with our commissioners as well as ourselves that would be great. That concludes folks who signed up to testify ahead of time. Should we continue into the next portion and invite additional comments? 
SARAH SAYEED:  Yes. Is there anyone who has not signed up before who would like to make a comment? I see a hand raised. Is that for interest in offering testimony? 
>> Yes. Erum. I am the Chief Executive Officer of Brooklyn community center. And I'm also a member of the language assistance advisory committee representing the urdu speaking community. I have actually two questions. First of all, I just want to say that we really appreciate all the great work CEC is doing. And incorporating all the languages for the interpretation services which were never included in this whole process. So it's a great effort by all the commissioners, and Dr. Sarah Sayeed. We really appreciate it. Will the ethnic media be used in terms of sharing this information that poll site interpretation services will be available? In different languages or not? Secondly, about the employment or hiring of the interpreters. Will it be announced by using the ethnic media or will the community‑based organizations will be involved in this process or not? One last point which I want to mention is that because I deal with the senior population mostly of them are urdu and Punjabi speaking members, the ballot is available in English language. A senior who cannot read or write English will the interpreters be allowed to read the name of the candidates on the ballot paper or not? Because a senior who does not know how to read English does not know what the name on the ballot is written, how are they going to continue voting? That's all from my side for the time being. If there are any other clarifying questions for me I'll be happy to answer. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  Thank you so much. If you could elaborate on this a little bit. What I'm hearing is that a senior comes in, and their eye sight is not good, and so therefore they cannot see the names on the ballot.  So they would need to understand who the names are, and then also I would think that someone might need to fill in the bubble for them. 
>> No. Not like that. It's obviously most of the seniors are from south Asian communities, those who speak English, Urdu, Bengali, or Punjabi languages. Some have not completed high school. Obviously reading English skills are zero. On the ballot paper when they go to cast the vote, the names on the ballot paper they're not able to read these names. If there is a family member with them or somebody can read and tell them. But in the case of an interpreter, will the interpreters be allowed to read the name of the candidates to the seniors or not? That's the point. And the font size I always notice on the ballot paper, the font size of the name is always very small. So it's sometimes even an adult is going ‑‑ you have to closely put a ballot paper in front of you to read appropriately what names are written on the paper. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  There are a number of issues you bring up and I thank you for that. I think maybe someone from the commission can answer the question about reading the names of the candidates. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you so much for raising those important questions, Erum. It would be great to receive your thoughts and comments in written form as well. We don't usually address questions during public hearings but this is to share the interpreter training that we shared with the members and stakeholders reviews this process that we're discussing. The question around interpreters' ability to (inaudible) that is part of the responsibilities of the interpreter. They must orally translate the entire ballot in its full form including instructions and including names of individuals, including ballot proposals. They must read the full document in full and offer no personal preference, guidance, political opinions, none of that. Just reading and responding to the document. Reading the document in full in its full accuracy. 
It would be great to receive this in written form. We appreciate you raising these questions because these also feed into things we need to be considering as a commission, things that need to be included in our interpreter training that we are revising prior to sharing with interpreters for the November 2020 election. Just a tiny note on the training content time line. 
The commission met with some stakeholders, we will continue to meet with additional community‑based partners and revise the content in July and August taking into consideration all the comments we received and then develop a finalized training that we'll then share with you all as well prior to using the interpreters. 
Thank you. Anyone else who would like to ‑‑ I don't see any other ‑‑ anyone else's hand raised or would like to speak? 
SARAH SAYEED:  There's a question in the chat ‑‑ you put it in there. Great. Anyone who hasn't yet emailed their testimony please send it to Gagan. Her email is in the chat. Anyone else ‑‑ does anyone else have a comment? I'm going to now ‑‑ if there are no other comments from participants, I'd like to just open it up for commissioners to have discussion. Do you have any thoughts or comments you'd like to share based on what we heard? 
MARK DILLER:  If I can jump in. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Of course. 
MARK DILLER:  Thanks. Mr. Ahsan brought up a couple of very specific points that I thought were worthy of some consideration. The small but very important point about wearing credentials in a way that ‑‑ I'm sorry, backing up. Having the interpreters wear credentials that identify them appropriately. I assume there will be some sort of credential because they would need that in order to gain access to the poll site anyway. That makes all the sense in the world to me. 
There was something in his testimony which I hope we will see in writing having to do with interpreters being required to refrain from disclosing certain personal information, or collective information. I think that is ‑‑ I think if I understood the comment correctly it was not to in effect share who other people are voting for or some sort of cumulative idea of that. I think it's part and parcel of the professional responsibilities that are already outlined in the existing proposed rule. But I have no objection to including a specific like that. 
With respect to the complaint data, I think 30 days is awfully ambitious but some kind of recap of that does make sense to me. 
Ms. Hoerner suggested reaching out to certified legal and business translaters. That is an implementation issue but I think it makes a lot of sense too. 
That's all I've got other than thanking those who came out for offering these good comments. Appreciate it. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  I too want to thank everyone for their testimony today. I think there are a few things that I'm sure we have already examined but it's clear based on the testimony today that we may want to look a little bit deeper into the issues of literacy, both on the interpreter side as well as on the I'll call it the voter side or the client side. I don't need to go into any more on that but I think we need to have it on our list of further investigation. 
Also I've been thinking a lot about the elderly, and those who have different issues when it comes to navigating the polling sites and the ballot itself. 
I know that there are a lot of elderly who will say to me when I help them, where's so and so's name? And they want you to just find it for them. So I'm a little ‑‑ it's not really directing them to tell them who to vote for. But they do like an indication of where it is. Because the way they see the ballot there's a lot going on. They would like their eyes to ‑‑ help for their eyes to be focused on where they need to fill in the bubble. That I think is something ‑‑ it's a gray area but I just want to bring it up as something that I have seen that we might want to think about. 
But I really appreciate all of the testimony today. And I think there was a lot of good information. As Mark said once we get the written testimony I think we can dig in deeper and take very informative information. Thank you. 
DONNA GILL:  This is Donna Gill. My questions/comments were basically directed to Ms. Hoerner because she is actually an interpreter that is doing this. And if we're going to have to hire people or hire an agency that is equipped to do this kind of work, I was just wondering if there was some pointers that she can give us on this and the organizations that are actually doing the testing and the training basically so that we would have a better idea as to what to look for, so we'd be able to make this seemingly painless, and the fact that she is doing the work, and she is an interpreter. I figure she may be able to give us some pointers. That's the first thing. And yes, I do also want to thank everyone for their testimony. 
I'm hearing from Mr. Ali, and Ms. Hanif that cultural competency is actually needed with interpreters. Because they're going to have to understand the individuals ‑‑ the voters that they're working with, and sometimes if you know the culture of the individual, it's a little easier to have that type of transition, or because a lot of times people are not as accepting of help even though it is to their benefit if they don't perceive they're being respected as a person. 
MARK DILLER:  Donna, I don't know if you can see me shaking my head yes. I just thought I'd say that out loud. 
>> I agree with that as well. I think it's not cultural but linguistically competent. A lot of folks who ‑‑ just to give an example ‑‑ 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  Folks who speak Arabic there's a number of different dialects and a number of different cultural sensitivities sometimes in voting.  So we just want to make sure ‑‑ and the training that folks are aware of those, and know how to appropriately respond in a way that's not diminishing or undermining the voting process. 

SARAH SAYEED:  Are there any other comments or thoughts from commissioners at this point? 
MARK DILLER:  The only other thing I'd want to add is that the relatively few number of people who felt they needed to come out and testify can be interpreted ‑‑ sorry about that ‑‑ interpreted. 
(Laughter).
Can be viewed as a testament to the good work done by the staff in preparing all of these materials. Congratulations to Gagan and the whole team. 
>> I was having the same thought and I wanted to also say that I think that we heard some really good recommendations this evening overall. I think we're in good shape with this. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  I wanted to jump in and say the same. Also, I wasn't so eloquent at our last meeting but I really want to make sure that we're being very inclusive in terms of how each voter is approached and the dignity that each voter is given no matter what. So I think that ‑‑ not so eloquent the last time but I just wanted to make that point. 
SARAH SAYEED:  I appreciate the word dignity. I think we want as a commission to really affirm dignity in all of the different civic engagement activities that we're undertaking. Thank you for lifting that up. 
I would like to ask again if there are any other people who are on this meeting today if you would like ‑‑ I'm giving you another opportunity to make any additional comments. If there is no one, and I can't see if any hands are raised. Francis, Gagan, do you see any hands raised? No. So it sounds like right now we have exhausted the list of people who want to comment at this time. And we the staff will stay on this call in the event that someone wants to come and wasn't able to make it when it started to see if anyone else would like to offer comment. And we don't have a quorum today. So I don't think I need to entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting. Or the hearing. 
DONNA GILL:  I know you said it in the very beginning but ‑‑ an idea of the process as it stands right now? Where do we go from here? Because we're working with a time line and they're talking ‑‑ we heard that ‑‑ how do we get the public to know this is available? That's going to be some kind of campaign to advertise going forward. I was just wondering where we are going right now with the process. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Focusing first on the rule, what we will do is we will look for everyone who hasn't yet emailed to send us their testimony. And then we can think about how we are going to factor in the feedback into finalizing the rule. Once the rule is finalized, which we will try to make happen in the next couple of weeks ‑‑ then we have to submit it to the city record. We may need to go through ‑‑ if there are substantial revisions we probably need to go through ‑‑ Francis, you can correct me if I'm wrong ‑‑ we have to go through another internal approval process and then it gets posted in the city record. And once it's published it goes into effect 30 days after it's published. 
So that process should happen over the next few weeks. And then when does our ‑‑ we will need to make a decision in the near future about ‑‑ based on what's happening with COVID, how we're going to handle the in person interpretation. As you all know, for the primary there was no ‑‑ the city did not provide in person interpretation. BOE provided an interpretation but the city did not just out of concern for everyone's safety. So we're going to reach a moment in which we'll have to decide that ourselves. And then based on that decision, we will plan to do outreach accordingly. We did have an outreach awareness campaign for the primary where we provided materials and information in multiple languages on how to vote absentee. Because the city was encouraging people to vote absentee. So the decision about whether we're going to ‑‑ or when ‑‑ the decision for whether we're going to go forward with the in person interpretation needs to be made I think ‑‑ Gagan please correct me on this ‑‑ before September in order for us to ensure time for recruitment of interpreters. Am I right in that? 
GAGAN KAUR:  Yes. The hard deadline for the decision is 8 weeks prior to Election Day. That is the absolute hard deadline but we should make the decision before then. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  Sarah, if I might ask a question, we're talking a lot about at the poll site translation. What about getting information out in written form in a lot of the languages that we're talking about? I'm a little concerned ‑‑ I'll tell you my concern is rank choice voting we will be doing for the first time. I can foresee already that there's going to be a lot of confusion by the electorate on how to do this. And not quite sure or have faith that the BOE is going to get out information clearly and also in time for everyone. And also we know that they won't do it in all the languages. So it's just a question that I have and sort of foreseeing some issues and I wanted to bring it up. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Rank choice isn't going into effect in November, is it? 
>> No. 
AMY BREEDLOVE:  The city elections. But it is coming up. It's ‑‑ it's on the horizon.  '21. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Someone else? 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  I agree with Amy making sure that we are more proactive and helping do education around rank choice voting because that is going to ‑‑ it's pretty much shifting the way that elections have been held for the history of the city. I do want to mention something about translaters at poll sites. I was doing some election protection work on Election Day, and there were a ton of people who were going into the poll sites to vote. Some of them said they didn't receive their ballot in the mail. Some of them didn't apply for one because they didn't know that they could. I think that not having translaters at the poll sites, although I understand trying to be conscious and as cautious as possible with COVID in the moment, I do think that there was a missed opportunity in the moment with that ‑‑ I think there could have been a plan that was put together to figure it out. I think for November we're going to have to figure out a plan because it's going to be a general election, and even if there's going to be mail in ballots ‑‑ I spoke to a ton of people who even requested they get their ballot and at the last second were like I don't trust the mail system or the Board of Elections. I don't trust ‑‑ I don't trust ‑‑ I'd rather come do it in person. That is something I want us to kind of keep thinking about. And really being as intentional as possible as we should be as Civic Engagement Commission, and encouraging more people to participate in elections as safely as possible. 
One thing I do want to mention is I know that with the pandemic and everything that's happening related to COVID, participatory budgeting has been sort of suspended I guess. So I think that we need to ‑‑ especially with all that we're seeing in the streets of people demanding city invest resources appropriately, into communities and to invest in a way that makes communities whole is important. And I want to make sure that just because we can't do it this year that we shouldn't stop talking or planning out what budgeting on a citywide level is going to look like. 
If anything, this last city budget is really just demonstrating the power that communities have, and that people have. And how they want to up lift where they think the city should be investing its funds. So I want to make sure that just because it is on pause that we don't forget that that's a charge of ours as a commission, and that we continue to move that work forward in planning for the future so that we aren't stuck when we are able to move it forward. I'd rather us be more proactive on participatory budgeting and actually start moving that sooner rather than later. Thank you. I know people wanted to stop talking but I wanted to mention that. And hang up. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Thank you so much for that, Murad. If I could just respond super quickly. You're raising a really important point. I have an 80‑year‑old father and I said to him, did you request your absentee ballot? His answer was no, I would rather go vote in person. I think there are lots of people who feel that way. Given just the challenges of receiving the ballot and all of that, and that it's an important election, we definitely are going to be keeping that in mind. One of the things that happened in the primary in the city decision is just that there was ‑‑ everything was very, very uncertain. And I think we've now lived with the uncertainty for longer. The uncertainty is not as uncertain if that makes sense. And we also have to think about sort of the provision of PPE and all of that stuff because we are thinking about doing in person interpretation just to make it safe for all. So we'll be actively engaging those questions in the coming weeks. 
And then on the participatory budgeting piece, this isn't a meeting. We don't have a quorum. So I don't want to ‑‑ I really appreciate the points you made and I want to I guess just say that I have ‑‑ I think for all of us ‑‑ haven't seen so much interest in the city's budget as we have recently. We've been talking internally as a team about how this is a really important moment, for us to really strengthen this push from New Yorkers to learn more. And to get involved and have a voice in the budget process. And before this, if you had asked me three or four months ago ‑‑ I mean, one of the greatest hurdles in my head was how do we raise interest and attention in a budget? In the city's budget? And I feel like we are now at a moment where there is so much more interest and openness to having this kind of conversation. So I'm very excited about that. And we will share more in the next meeting. But we are thinking about ways, and we talked a little bit about the digital portal that we're setting up. We will be laying down the infrastructure over the next couple of months regardless of whether there's an allocation or not to build a citywide process. That will definitely continue. And we're also talking about doing a very small scale pilot. We'll be sharing more of that information with you in the next official meeting that we have. 
So thank you. Thank you for saying that. And for being so encouraging. And for pushing us to really do the things that we are charged with doing in a way that is courageous. Appreciate that. 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  Thank you, Sarah. I think we should go big or go home with participatory budgeting. I said that from day one. We should be allocating at least ten percent of the city's budget or at least 10 billion. I'm going to leave it at that even though I know that ten percent is not 10 billion. I'm going to leave it at that. Thanks. 
FRANCIS URROZ:  I just want to note that Shahana has her hand raised. 
Shahana Masum:  I just kind of ‑‑ Murad's answer, he mentioned an issue I want to mention. Coming up in November is a huge election coming, especially for our city. What I have seen in the early election and Election Day, many people when they ‑‑ the poll sites were not affiliated with a party. It was like a blank. And they said no, in a vote before, we voted on our primary but it's not there. Just think somebody has a language barrier ‑‑ I was coordinator for a center in Staten Island, and when my interpreter was helping one of the Spanish speaking voters, believe me, this voter couldn't keep up because there are so many questions coming, so many things they need to ask. It's very difficult for the other ‑‑ who doesn't speak English. This interpret very much is needed for the coming election. We need to focus on that as soon as possible and we need to make this faster process. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Thank you. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Do the commissioners have any clarifying questions for Shahana? Thank you so much. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Okay. If no one else has a comment or a question, you are free to depart. And we will stay in touch as we revise the rule with the commissioners. And also share the en‑‑ encouraging anyone who spoke today to submit your written comment as soon as possible and the team will stay on to see if anyone else joins. 
MARK DILLER:  Great. Do we have a date for the next meeting? 
SARAH SAYEED:  Not yet. Last year ‑‑ last summer, because we're just a year old, we did not meet in July and August but I'm wondering if we ought to meet in August to talk through some of the election stuff. So we'll be in touch about that. 
MARK DILLER:  Since we're doing it ‑‑ I'm sorry. 
SARAH SAYEED:  I was just saying I'm not sure if people are going to be away but it's virtual. 
MARK DILLER:  That was my point too. As long as ‑‑ I don't think I'll be away but if I am I'll make sure there's wifi. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Okay. 
MARK DILLER:  Very good. Thank you very much. Appreciate the work of the staff. Good to see everybody. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Good to see you too. 
Murad is still with us. 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  Are you guys having a staff meeting? 
SARAH SAYEED:  No. We're just waiting because we said this was going until six in case somebody calls in later or something. 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  I'll be on for a second. I still want to talk about PB and I think we should be doing a full hearing on it. I think we should do a public engagement strategy on getting from people what they think we should be doing. I know we've been up and out as a commission. I think it's really important that we ‑‑ I've been saying this since we started the conversation on commission but we have to strike when the iron is hot and I think that right now, people are incredibly interested in the budget. And being able to as residents of the city rightfully say where the money of the city should be going. It's tax dollars and it's their money they're giving the city. I think we have a really great opportunity right now to start leading the way in what it could look like. And taking the cues from people in communities across the city and letting us know what they want to see money going to, how they want to get there, and I think this passing the budget election, if anything only raised the bar further on having people think about where their money goes as a city and really investing in communities and not in agencies that are going to utilize their power against communities of color. The defunding of the NYPD while it didn't happen it really started to question what does community policing look like? What is the role of a police officer in our community? What is ‑‑ how can we as a community be better able to serve people who live here in a way that makes sense? I think those are all valid and great questions. Folks in the black community, leaders, organizers have been leading the way on what that could look like with PB and I think that's a great place to start and we can expand this even further in thinking about how housing, department of ‑‑ I know Department of Transportation is already doing some stuff. But really an investment that the communities across the city will be able to realized early on. I'll stop there. I keep saying that but then I keep talking. 
SARAH SAYEED:  It's great to hear you. I think we do have ‑‑ we have a participatory budgeting advisory committee meeting coming up. We'll send you that info if you want to join the conversation there. 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  Definitely do please. 
SARAH SAYEED:  So I see on my screen someone named Ravi Reddi. 
>> Hi. I'm the new associate Director for advocacy and policy at the Asian American federation. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Great. 
>> Thank you. I'm just sitting and watching and listening and kind of apprising myself on this.  I just started this job. I'm getting used to getting enmeshed and getting used to how this is working. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Glad to have you. It's very nice to have people participate in this kind of space.  We look forward to staying in touch and working with you all. 
>> Absolutely. 
SARAH SAYEED:  I'm seeing another person which says user. I don't know if that's someone from our team or someone else. 
FRANCIS URROZ:  I believe that's Ali. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Is it Ali Kaba? 
FRANCIS URROZ:  I believe so. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Okay. 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  I didn't say this earlier but thank you all for the work you're doing. I know that it is a very difficult time that we're all living through. But I want to make sure that you all know that it is genuinely appreciated. And I just want to thank Sarah, Gagan, Daniel, everyone at Civic Engagement Commission for their hard work. And also keeping us updated on things that are happening. It's genuinely appreciated. Francis, Francis, thank you for your constant daily emails. I don't know if people thank you for that but I do. 
(Laughter).

SARAH SAYEED:  That's great. Thanks. 
>> Thanks Murad for all you do as well. You must serve on like a gazillion commissions and representative bodies. I don't know how you do that. 
MURAD AWAWDEH:  This is the only commission that I'm on right now. But I am on a bunch of other boards. Those are equally rigorous, especially in the times we're living in right now. 
SARAH SAYEED:  Did someone just join us? 
GAGAN KAUR:  Did someone just join the public hearing on the proposed rule? It shows user 
>> This is Ali. I'm sorry a little earlier my voice was breaking up. This is the first time doing this. Hopefully next time I will do a better job. I'm really, really sorry. But I hope you guys understood what I said. I will definitely send my written testimony. Thank you so much for the opportunity. 
GAGAN KAUR:  Thank you so much, Ali. We definitely heard what you shared earlier. It added a lot of value to the conversation and we'll look out for your written testimony. Thank you so much for joining. 

SARAH SAYEED:  You did fine. So we still don't know the other user. That's okay. 
FRANCIS URROZ:  Would you like to call the meeting to a close? 
SARAH SAYEED:  Yes. I hereby now call the public hearing to a close. We're at the end. Thank you. 
FRANCIS URROZ:  Thank you. 
SARAH SAYEED:  I think we can all get off the phone. Or the computer. Do folks want to have a debrief or talk about it Monday or Tuesday?