Council advances modified Government Code section 11135 regulations to 15‑day public comment after extensive public input on definitions and language access

Council members Aldue and Walensky introduced a request to approve first modified text of the proposed regulations implementing Government Code section 11135 and to move the package into a 15‑day public comment period. They outlined the rulemaking history, explained that changes affected several definitions and articles, and asked the council to approve the modified text so a short public comment window could open.

Multiple public commenters and advocates urged revisions before finalizing the regulations. Dara Schur (speaking in an individual capacity and identifying prior work with Disability Rights California) asked the council to restore the word "diagnosis" in the definition of physical disability, to retain "perceived as having an impairment," and to restore a definition of "translator," arguing those terms have statutory grounding and important case‑law interpretations. Schur said removing "diagnosis" and collapsing "perceived as" could reduce clarity and depart from parallel statutory definitions.

Joanne Lane of the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles urged the council to strengthen language access provisions and keep regulations aligned with federal and local advances on language justice, warning that machine translation alone had proven inadequate during the pandemic. Kelle O'Hara of Equal Rights Advocates expressed disappointment that the package lacked clearer definitions for sex and gender and cited a recent attorney general lawsuit against a school district to underscore the stakes for transgender students.

Advocates from Leadership Counsel and other coalition organizations asked the council to ensure environmental‑justice harms affecting protected classes are explicitly covered by the rules. Several commenters said they would resubmit written comments during the formal 15‑day period to ensure their input is part of the record.

Council members acknowledged the public input and technical comments (for example, a suggested insertion of the word "receive" on page 23) and asked staff to circulate emailed comments. Council members Alude and Walensky moved to put the first modified text into a 15‑day public comment period; the motion passed on a roll call vote with members present recorded as voting aye.

The council and staff emphasized that written comments submitted during the upcoming 15‑day period will be part of the formal record and considered in the final statement of reasons.