Demand Our Access

This is a special episode of the Demand Our Access podcast. In this episode, I describe my journey with emergency preparedness for those of us with disabilities. I also describe my personal advocacy to ensure my local area has emergency preparedness plans and operations that are accessible to and inclusive of those of us with disabilities.

This episode was a very special one in the history of the Demand Our Access podcast because it was the first time I was joined by a guest. Erin Taylor from Upstream Access joined me to discuss emergency preparedness for those of us with disabilities. I was thrilled to have Erin join me because she is one of the people doing the most to ensure those of us with disabilities are prepared when emergencies strike. Among other things, Erin and I discussed Person-Centered Emergency Preparedness (P-CEP) a program developed in Australia and brought to America by Erin and Upstream Access. P-CEP is a program that certifies people in assisting disabled people in developing our individual emergency preparedness plans. Currently, I’m getting certified in P-CEP. If, after listening to the interview, I would appreciate your feedback on dedicating an episode to P-CEP.

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, we will be discussing emergency preparedness for those of us with disabilities. Specifically, I will explain why emergency preparedness is the most important issue we could ever advocate for, review what state and local governments are required to do to ensure their emergency preparedness is accessible to and inclusive of those of us with disabilities. After the review, we will use scenarios to see how we can advocate with our state and local governments to work with them on making their emergency preparedness accessible to and inclusive of us. Questions and Comments I greatly appreciate your feedback. If you want to contact me about this episode, or about Demand Our Access in general, you can fill out the contact me form on the Demand Our Access website. If you prefer email, you can write me at [email protected]. The Next Episode The next live episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, February seventh at two Eastern. I believe we will be continuing our look at emergency preparedness during that episode. We may even have a guest join us. I will keep you updated through the Demand Our Access website. Reviewing Accessible and Inclusive Emergency Preparedness Why This Really Matters Emergency preparedness is the most important issue we will advocate for with our state and local governments. Not being able to access web content matters. Not being able to apply for jobs matters. Not being able to enter buildings matters. Not having interpreters if you need them matters. Emergency preparedness is literally life or death. If we die in an emergency because our state and local government didn’t properly accommodate us, it won’t matter to us if a website is inaccessible, or if we can access a building. Since there are very few advocacy efforts addressing emergency preparedness, and because most state and local governments hardly comply with the ADA to begin with, the odds are extremely high that if a disaster took place in your community people with disabilities would die deaths that would have been preventable had your state and local government followed their legal requirements and ensured their emergency planning was accessible to and inclusive of those of us with disabilities. If we want to ensure we don’t die a preventable death when an emergency hits our communities, we must advocate with our governments for accessible and inclusive emergency planning and response. If you are one of those people who doesn’t believe government could or should have a role in your protection during an emergency, I want to ask you to consider what happens when an emergency requires you to evacuate your home and the government’s notice is inaccessible to you? What happens if you are required to evacuate but there is no accessible way for you to evacuate? What if you are required to evacuate to an inaccessible shelter? Issues like these and many more can and must be addressed by proper emergency preparedness on the part of our state and local governments. Introduction to Emergency Preparedness Six years ago I found two resources that have profoundly influenced my interest in emergency preparedness for people with disabilities. The Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies released an after action report in May of 2018 detailing widespread governmental failure to properly plan for people with disabilities as a part of emergency preparedness. The report made numerous suggestions as to how emergency preparedness could be more inclusive of people with disabilities while illustrating how ineffective planning led to preventable death, injury, and illness. Appendix G of the after action report has a detailed discussion of the limitations of additional needs registries. Additional needs registries became somewhat popular among state and local governments in the 1990s as a reported way to ensure people with disabilities got assistance during emergencies. The report from The Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies found too few people register, the registries do not guarantee help but planners count on them, knowing someone’s home and/or work address does not mean you know where they are in a disaster, and far better data is available. The Department of Homeland Security conducted several listening sessions on emergency preparedness and people with disabilities. The listening sessions also detailed widespread governmental failure at all levels to adequately pla

This is the recording from the October 18,2025 live episode. In this episode, we had a good discussion about how to advocate for our rights in private housing situations when the landlord or property manager knows nothing about the rights we have under the Fair Housing Act. To make this easier to follow, the content has been edited to remove the breaks and pauses. All of the discussion that took place during the episode is part of this recording.

In this episode, I tried something new. I began with a brief recap of our rights under the Fair Housing Act in private housing situations. Then, I posed some scenarios to the people listening live in Zoom and we had interactive discussions as to how we could advocate for our rights under the fictional scenarios. Note, I haven’t yet figured out how to make a transcript of these kids of recordings. So, I don’t know how to yet make them accessible to people with hearing disabilities. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, I am briefly introducing the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and its amendments. Since this is intended to be an introduction to the FHA, I will only be covering the protections afforded people based on disability status in this episode. If we continue this discussion in future episodes, I would be happy to discuss the protections based on other protected classes. Questions and Comments I greatly appreciate your feedback. If you want to contact me about this episode, or about Demand Our Access in general, you can fill out the contact me form on the Demand Our Access website. If you prefer email, you can write me at [email protected]. The Next Episode The next episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, September sixth. As of now, I’m not sure what I will cover in that episode. If there is interest in more about the Fair Housing Act, let me know. Citations As always, I will not be providing citations to sections of law during this episode. But the citations will be provided when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Introducing The Fair Housing Act Since I have not yet covered the Fair Housing Act (FHA) through Demand Our Access, this episode is intended to be a brief introduction to the FHA. I’m keeping this introduction brief, because I want to gage interest from the community in the subject of fair housing. If there is interest in diving deeper into housing discrimination, I’m very open to continuing this discussion into future episodes. Since this is a brief introduction, I have sought to keep the explanations at a very high-level. If we continue the housing discrimination discussion in future episodes, I will take deeper dives into specifics based on your feedback. I’m trying this new approach to introducing new subjects to see if community will assist me in planning what subjects are covered and how they are covered. I’m also hoping that by breaking things into smaller pieces they will be more relatable. With that explanatory information out of the way, let’s begin our introduction to the Fair Housing Act. Roadmap In this episode, I will be covering the following five topics: Brief history of the Fair Housing Act Intent of the Fair Housing Act Enforcement agencies Protected Classes and Scope Impact on People with Disabilities Brief History The Fair Housing Act (FHA) was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on April 11, 1968, one week after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. When it became law, the FHA was added as Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The original statute barred housing discrimination in terms of race, color, religion, and national origin. In 1974, the FHA was amended to add sex as a protected class. In 1988, the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA), added familial status and disability as protected classes when it comes to housing. The FHAA also added accessibility requirements that applied to newly constructed multi-family dwellings of four or more units intended to be occupied after March 13, 1991 to include certain accessibility features. Those accessibility features include: an accessible entrance on an accessible route; accessible common and public use areas; doors wide enough to accommodate a wheelchair; and more. The FHAA also granted the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) additional enforcement powers through the introduction of administrative hearings, civil penalties, and expanded judicial remedies. The FHAA transformed the Fair Housing Act from being a law that was largely symbolic to a law that would actually try to provide protections to those facing housing discrimination through meaningful enforcement. In 1995, the Housing for Older Persons Act (HOPA) provided criteria for 55+ and 62+ housing and modified the familial status provisions of the FHA. In 2021, HUD issued a directive covering gender and sexual identity under the FHA’s provision barring sex-based discrimination. Not to get too political, but I think most of us understand that today HUD is not likely to follow the 2021 directive. Intent of the FHA The FHA became law with the promise of eliminating housing discrimination and to promote more integrated, inclusive communities. It prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, financing, advertising, or zoning of housing on the bases of protected class. The protected classes under the FHA are: Race Color National origin Religion Sex (including ge

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Preliminary Information Questions and Comments I greatly appreciate your feedback. If you want to contact me about this episode, or about Demand Our Access in general, you can fill out the contact me form on the Demand Our Access website. If you prefer email, you can write me at [email protected]. The Next Episode Since the ACB convention is the first week in July and given that our family has a lot happening in July, I will not be doing a live episode of Demand Our Access in July. So, the next live episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, August second. As of now, I don’t know what topic I will cover in August. As always, I’m open to your ideas. Updating the Website Since I won’t be doing any live episodes during the month of July, I will be working on updating the Demand Our Access website. I will have more information about the updated website and maybe even demo it in August. Complaints Under Title II Introduction As a reminder, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II), primarily covers state and local governments. I have mentioned complaints under Title II in previous episodes. But this time I will be taking a deeper dive into complaints under Title II. I’m doing that because I think it is more important than ever for us to understand our options for filing complaints under Title II and the rights we have in filing directly with our state or local government. Citations Again, I will not be mentioning citations to sections of law during this episode. I will post the citations to the specific sections of law when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Public Entities As a reminder, Title II often confers responsibilities to what the law calls “public entities.” In general, public entities are an entire local government or individual sections of a local government. Sometimes, different responsibilities under the law apply to public entities depending on whether or not they employ at least 50 employees. To keep this simple, I will, most of the time, refer to local governments (not public entities). The rights we have and the responsibilities the government must meet will be the same. The technical differences in what defines a public entity don’t change our rights as disabled people. Roadmap In this episode, I will cover the following five topics: General complaint information Filing complaints with your local government Filing complaints with Federal Agencies Filing Complaints with the Department of Justice Tips on filing complaints General Complaint Information Where you Can File When a local government is discriminating against you based on your status as a disabled person, you can file your complaint in one of three places: The local government that is discriminating against you A federal agency that oversees the program that is the basis of your complaint With the Department of Justice (DOJ) You are not limited to filing in only one of the three places; for example, you could file both with your state or local government and with DOJ. Time Periods for Filing One important thing to remember is the time periods in which you must file. Complaints filed with DOJ or a federal agency must be filed within 180 days of the alleged discrimination. State and local governments, on the other hand, can require that complaints under Title II be filed within 60 days of the alleged discrimination. When facing discrimination, it is a very good idea to figure out your local government’s complaint procedures (if any), because you may need to file within 60 days of the events comprising the discrimination. Who can File You don’t have to be the person who actually experienced the disability discrimination in order to file a complaint. As long as you have the permission of the disabled person or you are their guardian, you can file a complaint under Title II. If you are so inclined, you can also file a complaint on behalf of a class of disabled people. But that’s something most people won’t try. So, I’ll leave it there. Filing with a State or Local Government Notice of Rights Under Title II, public entities are required to notify those of us with disabilities of, among other things, of our right to file a complaint with them when we believe they are violating our rights under Title II. In this case, I have used the term “public entity” because I have seen situations where a state or local government has adopted a general framework for complaint

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Preliminary Information Questions and Comments I greatly appreciate your feedback. If you want to contact me about this episode, or about Demand Our Access in general, you can fill out the contact me form on the Demand Our Access website. If you prefer email, you can write me at [email protected]. The Next Episode The next live episode will take place on Saturday June 21 at 2:00 PM Eastern time. Unless something changes, I will be diving deeply into complaints under Title II in that episode. Since I’m expecting to be preempted by the ACB convention during the first week in July, and with some things that will be happening with our family during the month of July, I will be taking the month of July off from the Demand Our Access podcast. So, after the June 21st episode, there will not be another episode until August. Maintenance of Accessibility Features, Assistive Mobility Devices, and Existing Facilities Under Title II Introduction In this episode, I am continuing my revisited look at Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II). As a reminder, Title II primarily covers state and local governments. In this episode, I will be covering topics I haven’t covered before as a part of the Demand Our Access project. So, I will not be discussing effective communication, service animals, general prohibitions against discrimination, and other topics previously covered. For information about those topics, please check out the episodes previously posted to the Demand Our Access website. During the month of July, I will be updating the website so that the page on Title II links to the episodes I think will help you best understand Title II. In this episode, I am also not covering topics that primarily tell state and local governments how to comply with Title II. The Roadmap section will tell you exactly what will be covered in this episode. Citations Again, I will not be mentioning citations to sections of law during this episode. I will post the citations to the specific sections of law when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Public Entities As a reminder, Title II often confers responsibilities to what the law calls “public entities.” In general, public entities are an entire local government or individual sections of a local government. Sometimes, different responsibilities under the law apply to public entities depending on whether or not they employ at least 50 employees. To keep this simple, I will, most of the time, refer to local governments (not public entities). The rights we have and the responsibilities the government must meet will be the same. The technical differences in what defines a public entity don’t change our rights as disabled people. Roadmap In this episode, I will be covering the following three topics: Maintenance of Accessible Features Assistive mobility devices Existing Facilities Since I have decided, where possible, to title this episode and future episodes with the topics to be addressed, I may not include the roadmap section in future episodes. I included the roadmap section here, because I wanted it to be consistent with the previous episodes on revisiting Title II. Maintenance of Accessibility Features Defining Accessibility Features Accessibility features are those facilities and equipment necessary for a local government to provide access to its activities, programs, and services to those of us with disabilities. This means that things like elevators provided to enable people with disabilities to move between floors are required to be maintained in working order. Electronic door openers are also examples of accessibility features that must be maintained in proper working order. There are only two things you need to know about local governments being required to maintain accessibility features: Local governments are required to maintain in operable and working condition those features of facilities and equipment that are required to be readily accessible and usable by people with disabilities. This section does not prohibit isolated or temporary interruptions of access or service due to maintenance or repairs. If a local government installs automatic door openers to assist people with disabilities in opening the heavy doors at city hall, the local government must ensure the electronic door openers are maintained in working condition. While it may be reasonable for a service interruption to last for a day or two if the electronic door

In this episode, Desiree and I discuss those terrible accessibility overlays that promise to make websites more accessible while actually doing little to improve accessibility. As Desiree’s demonstration shows, these overlays are hard to use, don’t behave consistently, and provide little in the way of greater access.

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, I am continuing my revisited look at Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II). As a reminder, Title II primarily covers state and local governments. In this episode, I will be covering topics I haven’t covered before as a part of the Demand Our Access project. So, I will not be discussing effective communication and service animals. For information about those topics, please check out the episodes previously posted to the Demand Our Access website. In this episode, I am also not covering topics that primarily tell state and local governments how to comply with Title II. The Roadmap section will tell you exactly what will be covered in this episode. Comments and Questions As always, I want to hear from you. To share your comments and questions about the material covered in this episode, or general thoughts about Demand Our Access, you can contact me by completing the contact form on the Demand Our Access website. If you would rather email, send your message to [email protected]. Citations To make the material easier to follow, I will not provide citations to sections of law. The links to the relevant sections of law will be included when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Roadmap In this episode, I will cover the following topics: Discrimination prohibited Illegal use of drugs Retaliation and coercion Personal mobility devices and personal services Continuing Our Look at Title II Discrimination Prohibited Even though the discrimination that is prohibited under Title II is largely in the law to tell state and local governments what they should be doing as a starting point for complying with Title II, it’s important for us (as disabled people) to understand what our local governments are supposed to be doing to include us. The material in this section is a bit dense. So, I have tried to summarize it in a way that communicates what you should know while leaving out a lot of legal language. Qualified Person with a Disability The definition of a qualified person with a disability is found in the Definitions section of Title II. I’m including here, because the Discrimination Prohibited section repeatedly references qualified people with disabilities. Defining a Qualified Person with a Disability Qualified individual with a disability means an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable modifications to rules, policies, or practices, the removal of architectural, communication, or transportation barriers, or the provision of auxiliary aids and services, meets the essential eligibility requirements for the receipt of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by a public entity. I know I said I wouldn’t include a lot of legal language, and I generally will not. I included the exact definition of a qualified person with a disability because it’s a definable term that’s used throughout Title II. All of that legal language can be simplified down to this: A qualified person with a disability is a person with a disability who, with or without an accommodation or modification, can participate in the activity or program they wish to join. If you want to swim and there are no physical limitations associated with your being able to swim, you are a qualified person with a disability for the purposes of taking swimming lessons. You are qualified to take swimming lessons even if you need an accommodation to take swimming lessons. No Disability Exclusion A state or local government cannot, based on our being disabled, prevent us from participating in its programs, nor may it deny us the benefits of its services. This is true even if the program in which we choose to participate or if the service we wish to benefit from is administered completely by a third party or jointly between our government and a third party. If your local government contracts with a company to provide its water bills, the water bills they provide must be accessible. The government cannot say that they aren’t responsible for the inaccessible bill because they contracted with a company to process them. 4Types of Discrimination In order to stay away from things that may be confusing, I’m not going to cover all the types of discrimination listed; instead, I’m going to focus on the ones I believe are most likely to be encountered by you in your dealings with your local government. Affo

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In the last episode of the Demand Our Access podcast, I discussed Texas v. Becerra, a lawsuit seeking to have Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) declared unconstitutional. If you want to learn more about the lawsuit, please listen to that episode or read the transcript of what I said about the lawsuit. During the questions and comments portion of that episode, there was a lot of interest in advocating for the protection of Section 504. So, this episode will present strategies those of you living in the 17 states can take to try to protect Section 504 and things those of us who don’t live in one of those 17 states can do to be heard. Before discussing how we can advocate to protect Section 504, I will discuss the next episode and let you know how you can contact me. The Next Live Episode The next live episode will take place on Saturday, April sixth at 2:00 PM EDT. In that episode, I am planning to continue my revisited look at Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act, primarily covering state and local governments. Comments and Questions If you have any comments and/or questions about the Demand Our Access project, you can fill out the contact form on the Demand Our Access website or you can email me at [email protected]. How You Can Advocate for Section 504 If You Live in One of the 17 States As a reminder, the 17 states suing to have Section 504 declared unconstitutional are as follows: Alabama Alaska Arkansas Florida Georgia Indiana Iowa Kansas Louisiana Missouri Montana Nebraska South Carolina South Dakota Texas Utah West Virginia Contacting Your Attorney General If you live in one of the 17 states, the best thing you can do is contact your attorney general and let them know why you support Section 504 and that you want them to withdraw from the lawsuit. In order to make contacting your attorney general easier, I have worked with ChatGPT to create a table of contact information for the 17 attorneys general involved in the lawsuit. The table provides the name, mailing address, phone number, and website for each attorney general. I didn’t include an email address and/or contact form, because those methods of contact weren’t consistent enough among the attorneys general for them to be easily included in a table. if you would rather send an email or complete a contact form, visit your attorney general’s website to see how you can do that. I’m not going to read the names of the attorneys general and their individual contact information. The table of contact information will be provided at the end of the transcript when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. What to Say Obviously, you should voice your support in a way that is comfortable for you and that reflects your voice. So, I can’t tell you exactly what to say when contacting your attorney general. Also, I can’t provide a different script for every possible method of communication you may use to contact your attorney general. So, I have developed a short sample script that works whether you contact your attorney general over the phone, through email, by using a contact form, by writing a letter, or even if you meet them. Before providing the script, I want to make one important point: the more personal your appeal the more likely it is to be heard. That doesn’t mean you should provide health information or anything else that you typically don’t provide strangers. What it means is that the more you can demonstrate how Section 504 has personally helped you, the more impactful your support of Section 504 will be when offered to your attorney general. I say that because attorneys general hear from lots of people every day. Much of what they receive is from people who are simply regurgitating what one organization or another has told them to say by providing a template or sample script. While that will be what you will also be doing, you can make your support of Section 504 more impactful by adding some of your personal experience with Section 504 to what I will provide here. In my view, the more personal information about how Section 504 has been a positive in your life really matters in this case because your attorney general doesn’t understand the benefits to those of us with disabilities that have been gained as a result of Section 504. Even worse, they believe it shouldn’t exist. This means convincing them to s

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode I will be covering the lawsuit threatening Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504). Sharing my Feelings Usually, I try to avoid my personal feelings when I discuss the law as a part of Demand Our Access. In preparing this episode, I had an impossible time fully separating my feelings of anger and hurt from the material I’m presenting. Given the reality that if the states are successful all of us with disabilities will have significantly fewer civil rights, I’m hoping you can understand why some of my feelings and opinions have made their way into this material. Before discussing Section 504 I will briefly describe the next episode and provide my contact information. The Next Episode The next live episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, March 15. In that episode, I will continue my revisited look at Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Questions and Comments As always, I’m interested in hearing from you. Please provide any feedback by completing the contact form on the Demand Our Access website or by emailing me at [email protected]. The Threat to Section 504 Briefly Describing Section 504 So we all understand the potential magnitude of this lawsuit, I want to briefly describe Section 504’s history and what it covers. As mentioned earlier, Section 504 is a section of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which was signed into law by President Richard Nixon. The regulations implementing Section 504 were not published by the Department of Health and Human Services until 1977, after the protests addressed in the documentary Crip Camp. Simply put, Section 504 applies to programs of the federal government and programs receiving money from the federal government. This means that Section 504 currently provides legal protections to those of us with disabilities in all public programs offered by the federal government and all programs receiving any funding from the federal government. For more information about Section 504, check out the episode titled Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Texas v. Becerra On September 26, 2024, a group of 17 states led by Texas filed suit against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in the Northern District of Texas. The currently named defendant in the suit is Xavior Becerra (the secretary of HHS during the Biden administration). This is why the lawsuit is currently referred to as Texas v. Becerra. Note, the link to the complaint filed by the 17 states posted to the Demand Our Access website when this episode of the podcast is posted goes to a reasonably accessible PDF on the Texas attorney general’s website. Participating States The 17 states participating in the lawsuit are as follows: Alabama Alaska Arkansas Florida Georgia Indiana Iowa Kansas Louisiana Missouri Montana Nebraska South Carolina South Dakota Texas Utah West Virginia Things to Know About the Lawsuit To, hopefully, not get too technical, I want to briefly cover the seven major aspects of the complaint filed by the 17 states. After briefly highlighting the important aspects of the complaint, I will delve into more specifics about some of them. I have organized the list of seven things you currently need to know about the lawsuit in a way that, I hope, addresses questions in an order most of you may be thinking about them: In a status report filed with the court on February 19, the Department of Justice, which has not yet said how it will participate in the lawsuit, and the 17 states asked for a pause in the cases timeline. Despite previous reporting, all 17 states that initially joined the lawsuit are still participating. The lawsuit seeks to have Section 504 declared unconstitutional. The lawsuit wants the rules developed by the Biden administration to further codify how Section 504 applies to health care providers dismissed. A lot of the complaint mentions how the HHS rules will affect Medicaid. The complaint seeks to limit the so-called integration of those of us with disabilities into community programs. Much of the language in the complaint focuses on HHS’s determination that gender dysphoria is covered under Section 504 and that people with gender dysphporia are protected by Section 504. The Unconstitutionality of Section 504 Since this is not an episode about constitutional law, I’m not going to dive deeply into constitutional arguments. Here, my goal is to provide a basic amount of educat

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. The Next Episode The next episode of the Demand Our Access podcast will take place on Saturday, March first. In that episode, I will continue our second look at Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II). If you have any questions or comments about this episode or Demand Our Access in General, I would love to hear from you. You can email me at [email protected]. You can also complete the contact form on the Demand Our Access website. Introduction Title II primarily sets forth the requirements state and local governments are supposed to follow to ensure their activities, programs, and services are accessible to those of us with disabilities. Unfortunately, their isn’t a single state or local government complying with Title II. Even worse, most state and local governments are demonstrably out of compliance with Title II. This deliberate noncompliance with Title II on the part of every state and local government adds to the discrimination faced by those of us with disabilities on a daily basis. Since we all need to interact with our state and local government, their lack of compliance with Title II causes us lots of stress and difficulty. For those reasons, I chose Title II to be the first topic I discussed through the Demand Our Access podcast. Over the last roughly 2.5 years, I hope my ability to teach important legal concepts has improved. So, I thought it would be good if I revisited Title II now. Much of the substance covered here will be very similar to what was covered more than two years ago. But I am, hopefully, presenting the information in a way that makes it easier to understand. Episode Roadmap I am covering these topics in this episode because they are the foundation of compliance under Title II. In the next episode, I will cover more of the information you will need to effectively request an accommodation or modification from your state or local government. If terms like accommodation and modification don’t mean anything to you now, they should when I finish our revisited two-part look at Title II. Below are the eight topics I will cover in this episode: Code of Federal Regulations Defining a Public Entity Project Civic Access ADA coordinator Notice of rights Grievance procedure Self-evaluation Transition plan Title II Revisited Code of Federal Regulations Laws don’t often contain all their legal requirements. Congress regularly directs federal agencies to develop or promulgate what the law will require. Under the ADA, several federal agencies have responsibility for developing guidance as to what it means to comply with the ADA. When an agency has responsibility for clarifying what compliance with section(s) of the ADA means, they have enforcement power over those section(s). The Department of Justice (DOJ) has primary responsibility for establishing what guidelines for compliance under title II. DOJ also has primary enforcement power over Title II. When a federal agency establishes what constitutes compliance, those requirements are published in the Code of Federal regulations. When I cite to a section of law (either during the episodes or on the website) I will almost always be citing to the Code of Federal Regulations. Often, the Code of Federal Regulations is referred to as C.F.R. When I refer to a section of C.F.R, I’m referring to a section in the Code of Federal Regulations. For the rest of this episode, I’m not going to mention any section in the Code of Federal Regulations. I’m not mentioning specific sections of the Code of Federal Regulations here, because I have realized mentioning the citations is very distracting for listeners. Even though I won’t mention the citations to the Code of Federal Regulations, they will be provided when the text of this episode and this accompanying audio file are posted to the Demand Our Access website as a podcast episode. Defining a Public Entity A public entity is defined in 28 C.F.R. § 34.104. Section 35.104 is the list of definitions under the ADA. The definition of public entity has three parts: any state or local government any department, special purpose district, or instrumentality of state, states, or local government the National Railroad Passenger Corporation and other commuter authorities All public entities with at least 50 employees should appoint their own ADA coordinator and have their own grievance procedure. Most local governments, if they have an ADA coordinator at all, d

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction This episode has two main topics: advocacy updates from Desiree and I; and playing the blind card while advocating. The next live episode will take place on February 15 at 2:00 EST. I don’t yet have a planned topic for that episode. If you have any comments and/or suggestions, please write me at [email protected] or complete the contact form at Demand Our Access. Advocacy Updates From Desiree and I My Advocacy Updates While I can’t yet discuss everything I’m working on, I want to mention my complaint with the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), and issues I’m having with the Oregon Employment Department (OED). My EEOC Complaint The EEOC has accepted my charge of discrimination and notified my former employer. While awaiting their response, I have decided that, if they agree, I will attempt to resolve my discrimination through mediation run by the EEOC. I have made the choice to try mediation, even though I doubt it will be successful, because mediation could bring about a much faster result. Also, there is the reality that the current administration is seemingly considerably less likely to litigate cases of disability discrimination. But even if they don’t, I still have hope that the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry, which has a partnership agreement with the EEOC, will investigate if mediation fails. My Issues with the Oregon Employment Department After trying for more than a month, I made the difficult decision to stop seeking additional unemployment benefits. The truth is that constantly fighting for the access I need to consistently get the unemployment benefits I’m entitled to receive from an agency with little to no knowledge of its legal responsibilities under Title I and no desire to meaningfully provide the accommodations I’m entitled to receive from them was causing me tremendous stress. So, I have begun the process of trying to force them to follow the law by filing with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry. At this point, I don’t believe the Department of Justice will assist me. So, I hope I can, at least, make it so the next blind person needing accommodations from OED to get the benefits they deserve doesn’t suffer the amount of discrimination I have suffered. Desiree’s Traveling with a Service Animal As you may know, Desiree has a new guide dog. While you are listening to this, she is in Florida at a conference. Prior to flying to Florida, she had to complete the forms necessary to fly with a service animal. What you are about to hear is the inaccessibility she encountered while completing the required forms. In her recording, Desiree mentioned the company Open Doors that enables you to register your service animal with five different airlines. Playing the Blind Card Introduction to Playing the Blind Card While I’m calling what I am talking about here the blind card, it’s important to note that the analysis I will share here applies to all situations where a disabled person uses stereotypes and assumptions about disabled people and those of us with disabilities to encourage nondisabled people to make something more accessible. Obviously, what I’m sharing here is strictly my opinion. I recognize and appreciate others will disagree. I’m sharing this anyway to hopefully stimulate thought and provoke what I believe is an important discussion. The last episode of the Demand Our Access podcast focused on how we can advocate during these difficult political times. During the question and comment portion of the live version of the podcast, the issue of playing the blind card while advocating was raised a couple of times. Since I never play the blind card, I thought I would take some time to explain my personal opposition to playing the blind card while advocating. Why I Never Play the Blind Card I never use the negative stereotypes and negative assumptions many sighted people have about blindness and those of us who are blind when I’m advocating is that feeding on those stereotypes and assumptions continues the disrespect, whether understood or not, by the sighted person of me and the rest of us who are blind. Simply put, if someone believes blind people are less capable, believes we deserve credit for doing everyday tasks that are easy for them but which they incorrectly assume are more difficult for us than they are, or develops (whether encouraged or not) a feeli

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Briefly Explaining Accessibility Overlays So we are all on the same page, I want to briefly describe the kinds of overlays involved here. Several companies, including AccessiBe, have been marketing overlays to government agencies, businesses, and nonprofits. In marketing these overlays, these companies, including AccessiBe, are selling the myth that installing these overlays will make websites fully compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). The idea is that if these overlays are used, websites will fully comply with WCAG and the websites will be fully accessible. As anyone who uses assistive technologies knows, these overlays don’t make websites fully usable to those of us who use assistive technologies. As the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) mentions in its document explaining the proposed consent agreement discussed soon, AccessiBe’s Access Widget doesn’t even create compliance with WCAG. How you can Comment on the Proposed Fine of AccessiBe Explaining AccessiBe AccessiBe is an Israeli company that develops and sells what it calls AccessWidget. AccessiBe has been promoting the idea that all companies, government agencies, and nonprofits need to do to is install AccessWidget and their websites will be accessible to everyone. Currently, AccessiBe’s website boasts that more than 100K websites have been made accessible to everyone through the use of AccessWidget. The current price for using AccessWidget is $490 annually for sites with less than 1,000 pages. For websites with less than 10,000 pages and for premium add-ons, the current annual cost for AccessWidget is $1,400. For sites with less than 100,000 pages and for premium add-ons, the current annual cost is $3,490. The FTC’s Fine On January sixth, the Federal Trade Commission announced a proposed consent agreement with AccessiBe and asked for public comment. Under the terms of the proposed consent agreement, AccessiBe would be fined $1 million for alleged violations of law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices. Speaking about AccessiBe’s actions, the FTC’s analysis of the proposed consent agreement says the following: This matter involves AccessiBe’s marketing and sale of a web accessibility software plug in called AccessWidget. AccessiBe represented that AccessWidget could make any website compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (“WCAG”), a comprehensive set of technical criteria used to assess website accessibility. AccessiBe advertised these claims on its website and social media, as well as in articles that were formatted as impartial and objective reviews on third-party websites. AccessiBe also failed to disclose its material connections with the publishers of those third-party articles. The proposed complaint alleges that AccessWidget did not make all websites WCAG compliant, and that the company’s claims were false, misleading, or unsubstantiated. The proposed complaint also alleges that formatting the third-party articles and reviews as independent opinions by impartial authors and publishers was false and misleading, and that AccessiBe’s failure to disclose its material connections with the publishers of those articles was deceptive. The proposed order contains provisions designed to prevent AccessiBe from engaging in these and similar acts and practices in the future. Provision I prohibits AccessiBe from representing that its automated products, including accessWidget’s artificial intelligence and other automated technology, can make any website WCAG compliant, or can ensure continued compliance with WCAG over time as web content changes, unless the company has competent and reliable evidence to support the representations. Provision II prohibits AccessiBe from misrepresenting any fact material to consumers about any of the company’s products or services, such as the value or total cost; any material restrictions, limitations, or conditions; or any material aspect of its performance, features, benefits, efficacy, nature, or central characteristics. Provision III prohibits AccessiBe from misrepresenting that statements made in third-party reviews, articles, or blog posts about its automated products, including accessWidget’s artificial intelligence and other automated technology, are independent opinions by impartial authors; that an endorser is an independent or ordinary user of the automated product; or that the endorser is a

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction Without getting too political, I think most people would agree that advocating for civil rights will not be the same under the incoming Trump administration as it has been under the Biden administration. That being said, I strongly believe that advocating for our rights, even if you don’t believe our advocacy efforts will be as successful, is even more important than maybe it has ever been. I say that because if the Trump administration is serious about cutting programs that provide greater access and inclusion, one of the best ways we can defend the programs we need is to demonstrate how many things still aren’t working. To put it another way: if very few people are requesting accommodations or modifications, or asking government to enforce violations, the easier it will be for officials to argue that our civil rights programs aren’t needed. Before getting into how we can advocate for our rights during the second Trump administration, I think it’s important to provide some reminders as to what actually happened during the first Trump administration and how little we are on his mind: The first Trump administration made no real effort to repeal or seriously weaken the ADA and related laws. Trump almost never talks about the ADA and those of us with disabilities. He has not promised to reduce the rights of those of us with disabilities. Trump wouldn’t get many political points by launching an attack against the disability community and/or by threatening to destroy the access we currently have. I shared those reminders because I believe the first Trump administration, at least when it comes to the civil rights of those of us with disabilities, is a good indicator of what the second Trump administration will be like for our advocacy efforts. As you may remember, the first Trump administration did basically nothing to improve access for those of us with disabilities. But it didn’t go out of its way to destroy the gains we have made prior to Trump taking office for the first time. Currently, that is what I expect to happen beginning on January 20. Since I don’t expect our concerns to be taken seriously, we need to begin our look at advocating during the second Trump administration by considering how we can advocate for our rights outside of the Department of Justice, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the rest of the federal agencies with oversight over our civil rights laws. Advocating for Our Rights Under the Second Trump Administration A key to our advocacy efforts under the second Trump administration will be using the state and local laws that provide us similar protections to those we have under the ADA at the federal level. How effective advocacy efforts will be at the state and local level will depend, in part, on how seriously your state and/or local government takes the civil rights of those of us with disabilities. So, everyone’s mileage will not be the same. But everyone, except those of you living in Alabama, has a state law promising civil rights protections to disabled people. Obviously, I cannot cover the 49 state laws that provide protections to those of us with disabilities on this podcast. In the recording, I discussed a table listing the state-specific laws. I was not able to publish that table to the site, because I am having issues with the way WordPress is interpreting the HTML for the post with the table. In case you consider your state’s law, I want to give you a few important reminders: No state law can provide us fewer protections than we get from the ADA and related laws. States are allowed to provide greater and different protections than are provided by the ADA. Most of the state laws providing us civil rights protections are very similar to the protections provided by the ADA. Some states offer protections of our civil rights when it comes to education. Some states offer protection of our civil rights when it comes to financial issues. Some states offer protection of our civil rights when it comes to housing. Only a few states directly call out protections similar to those offered by Title II of the ADA (covering the activities, programs, and services of local governments). Most state laws address the protections offered by Titles I and III of the ADA (covering employment and businesses and nonprofits respectively). Advocating Under Title I and Your State’s Law As you most likely know, The Eq

My Mastodon Handle In case anyone is interested, I joined Mastodon. My handle is @[email protected]. All of the posts I make to the Demand Our Access website will automatically be shared to my Mastodon account. I look forward to meeting you on Mastodon. Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, I will briefly recap Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title I) before discussing steps you should take in case you face discrimination at work. If you have any comments or questions about this episode, you can complete the contact form on the Demand Our Access website, or you can email me at [email protected]. For more information about Title I, visit the page called ADA Title I Information. If you are concerned as to how recent political events will affect the ability of people with disabilities to have concerns of discrimination addressed by the federal government, I will be covering that in the next episode. That episode will be live on ACB Community on Saturday, December seventh at 2:00 PM EST. It will be posted to Demand Our access shortly after it is presented live. As I have said several times before, there is no way to cover this kind of material without using words like "impaired" that many of us in the disability community don’t use. I’m using words like "impaired" here because those are the words used in the law. Whether we like it or not, when communicating about the law we are required to use terms that are outdated. Maybe someday the ADA will be revisited and the updated law will provide for meaningful enforcement and be written in modern language. For now, we have to discuss the law as it has been written. Briefly Recapping Title I Our brief recap of Title I is based on the rules defining compliance with Title I as set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in 29 C.F.R. § 1630. To make this presentation easier to follow, I’m not going to mention the exact citations to different sections of the Code of Federal Regulations. If you are interested in the citations, you can find them in the episodes where I discussed Title I. I decided that the term "covered entity", while used in the Code of Federal Regulations, may be too confusing for people just learning about Title I. So, I have decided to replace the term "covered entity" with the term "employer". While I’m doing this to make the presentation easier to follow, it must be remembered that not all employers are covered by Title I; for example, if an employer employs fewer than 15 employees that employer is not covered by Title I. If you heard either of the episodes where I discussed Title I in greater detail, some of this will be review for you. I have included what I believe are some of the most important things to know about our rights under Title I here so if someone listens to this episode prior to listening to the episodes on Title I, some of the information they will need is here. Important Concepts For an employer to be covered byTitle I, it must have at least 15 employees. The United States government is not subject to the provisions of Title I; however, Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 provides similar protections for federal positions. To be clear, state and local governments are covered by Title I. If you work or you are interested in working for a state or local government, what I am covering here applies to you. Private membership clubs (excluding labor organizations) are not covered by Title I. Religious institutions are covered by Title I. But they may give preference to people of their religion. Members of the clergy and people perform essentially religious functions are excluded from the protections of Title I. Discrimination Prohibited It is unlawful for an employer to discriminate on the basis of disability against a qualified individual in regard to the following: Recruitment, advertising, and job application procedures Hiring, upgrading, promotion, award of tenure, demotion, transfer, layoff, termination, right of return from layoff and rehiring Rates of pay or any other form of compensation and changes in compensation Job assignments, job classifications, organizational structures, position descriptions, lines of progression, and seniority lists Leaves of absence, sick leave, or any other leave Fringe benefits available by virtue of employment, whether or not administered by the employer. Selection an

Introduction As the title indicates, this episode is about using artificial intelligence (AI) to advocate for our legal rights and to learn more about the law. Specifically, I demonstrate using AI to find who to contact when you need to make an ADA request of your local government, having AI draft the substance of an ADA request, and using AI to learn more about the law. All demonstrations were done using ChatGPT. Since some people don’t want to pay for ChatGPT, I demonstrate these tasks in the free version too. Important Notes on ChatGPT ChatGPT is a tool that can make doing things faster and more efficient. ChatGPT makes mistakes. Don’t use it to do important work for you unless you can check its results. For making an ADA request, ChatGPT doesn’t need to be perfect. It only needs to communicate the basics of a request. The paid version of ChatGPT provides much better, faster responses than does the free version. The free version will make developing an accommodations request easier, especially if you don’t know how to make an accommodations request. Why I Won’t Share Exact Prompts In thinking about it, I decided I couldn’t share exact prompts here as suggestions for you. I can’t share exact prompts here because the responses ChatGPT provides depends on a number of factors including: how often you use it; how often you have asked it to perform tasks similar to what you would be asking it to do when making an accommodations request; and what information you need it to provide. As an example, finding the ADA coordinator for Boston, MA is significantly easier than is finding the ADA coordinator for Leander, TX, as the recording demonstrates. Since I don’t think providing exact prompts will work, I want to strongly encourage you to try using ChatGPT, whether you have the paid or free version) to help you develop an accommodations request under the ADA. If you try using ChatGPT to make an accommodations request or to learn more about the law, please let me know. I would appreciate hearing about your experiences. Important Notes On ChatGPT’s capabilities The paid version can create a sample request in different formats, including Word. The free version cannot provide sample text in different formats, but you can paste its sample text into the app of your choice. The paid version can provide actual names of people holding different positions. The free version does not give specific contact information. The paid version can be customized to learn how you want it to work. The free version cannot be customized. Conclusion I strongly believe AI can do much to help all of us make ADA requests and learn more about our legal rights. If you are interested, I urge you to give ChatGPT a try. You may find that by using it you are more comfortable making ADA requests and you may be more willing to demand your access.

About Me It has been more than two years since I shared a little about me in one of these episodes. So, I am going to do it here for the benefit of people who have started listening since I last shared a bit about myself. Education and Certifications I have a law license from Massachusetts. I am a certified ADA coordinator. I am a certified Professional in Accessibility Core Competencies’. I am a member of the ADA Trainer Leadership Network. Professional Background I am the disability analyst for Portland Parks & Recreation in Portland, Oregon. Previously, I was the ADA Title II disability policy analyst in Portland’s Office of Equity and Human Rights. I was a contract attorney for Disability Rights Advocates in Berkeley, California. I was a staff attorney for the then American Bar Association’s Commission on Mental and Physical Disability Law. A Few Personal Things I was born totally blind. I am a member of the American Council of the Blind. I live in Oregon with my wife Desiree and the two youngest of my three stepdaughters. I an a huge sports fan, especially baseball. I am an avid reader and writer. While I enjoy learning about assistive technologies, I know Desiree knows more about them than me. I love animals. We have two cats, Rain and Yoyo. Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Resources The provisions of Section 504 are set forth in 10 C.F.R. § 4. The Department of Justice’s Guide to Disability Rights Laws has a good description of Section 504. The Department of Education also has an informative page on Section 504. As always, any resources discussed in this episode will be linked to when the episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Section 504 Introduction Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) is a landmark civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on disability. It was designed to ensure those of us with disabilities are not excluded from, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that receives federal financial assistance. Section 504 laid the foundation for future disability rights legislation in the United States, most notably the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). History of Section 504 The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on September 26, 1973. Although the act as a whole aimed to provide support for people with disabilities in areas such as employment and independent living, it was Section 504 that specifically addressed civil rights. The language of Section 504 was groundbreaking, as it introduced the concept of accessibility for people with disabilities into federally funded programs and activities, essentially stating that people with disabilities should be treated the same as those without disabilities. Section 504 was modeled after earlier civil rights laws, such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibited discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in federally funded programs. By extending civil rights protections to people with disabilities, Section 504 marked a turning point in the disability rights movement. While the law was passed in 1973, its implementation was delayed for several years due to opposition from various government agencies. It wasn’t until a series of protests by disability rights activists, including the historic 504 Sit-ins in 1977, that regulations enforcing Section 504 were issued by the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Crip Camp If you want to learn more about the sit-ins that were responsible for the federal government finally issuing regulations under Section 504, I highly recommend the documentary Crip Camp. Crip Camp, released in 2020, is maybe the only documentary that tries to tell the story of the civil rights movement of those of us with disabilities from our perspectives. If you know of another documentary I should watch that tells our story largely in our voices, please let me know. Definition of a Qualified Individual with a Disability Under Section 504, a person with a disability is defined as any individual who: Has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities Has a record of such an impairment, or Is regarded as having such an impairment. If the three-prong definition of a person with a disability under Section 504 sounds familiar, it should. The ADA and Section 504 both define a person with a disability the same way. A “qualified” person with a

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, I am covering how disabled parents can advocate for their rights to be accommodated by the schools of their children. Since public schools are covered by Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II) and private schools, except most religious schools, are covered by Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title III) I will briefly recap important concepts under both title II and Title III. For more information about Titles II and III respectively, please visit the pages entitled ADA Title II Information and ADA Title III Information. Links to both pages will be in the episode notes when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. Additionally, you may also want to review the episode called Effective Communication under Titles II and III. That, too, will be linked in this episode when it is posted to the website. If you have any comments or questions, please use the contact form on the Demand Our Access website, or email me at [email protected]. Recapping Titles II and III For those of you who heard the episode Advocating for Our Rights under Title II and/or heard the episode Advocating for Our Rights Under Title III, the review materials here will not be new. I have included them here, though, so if someone needs what I believe is the most important information to advocate for their rights as a disabled parent, all of that information will be in one place. Recapping Title II Since this is only a recap of our rights under Title II, I have chosen to cover only accommodations and modifications under Title II and effective communication under Title II. I have chosen these two topics because requests for accommodation and/or modification are how we get our rights under Title II and most requests for accommodation made under Title II relate to effective communication. Requests for Accommodation or Modification Requests for Modification I’m beginning with a discussion of modifications because they are more straightforward. When you request a modification, you are requesting a state or local government modify an existing policy, practice, or procedure to enable you as a disabled person to participate. Here are some examples of when you may need to request the modification of a policy, practice, or procedure from a state or local government: If a city has a policy that electric vehicles are not allowed in a park, someone using an assistive mobility device would have the right to have the policy modified so they can use their wheelchair in the park. If a state has a policy banning all animals from a museum, the handler of a service animal would need to request a modification to that policy allowing service animals to enter the museum. If a county has a policy requiring paper applications be completed by someone needing benefits, people with any number of disabilities would have the ability to request the policy be modified. Requests for Accommodation Requests for accommodation cover anything that does not involve the modification of a policy, practice, or procedure. Here are some examples of accommodations: If someone requests a sign language interpreter, they are requesting an accommodation. If someone requests an accessible electronic document, they are requesting an accommodation. If someone requests assistance in completing a print form, they are requesting an accommodation. If someone requests a public meeting be moved to a more accessible facility, they are requesting an accommodation. An Important Note on Modifications and Accommodations There may be circumstances when you need to request both a modification and an accommodation; for example, if a county does require the completion of a print form for someone to access benefits, a person with a disability may both choose to request a modification to the policy to ensure the county stops discriminating against people with disabilities. The person would then need to request an accommodation to ensure they can complete the inaccessible print form while the policy is being modified. Effective Communication I have included effective communication under Title II, but you must remember the effective communication requirement also applies to entities covered by Title III. To keep this simple, I have written this section so that it only applies to Title II; however, I have included the biggest difference between effective communication under Title II and effective communication unde

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Advocating for Our Rights Under Title III Introduction As a refresher, Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title III) applies to businesses and nonprofits. In this episode, I will briefly recap important concepts under Title III. I will then discuss the steps I take when I need to advocate with a business or a nonprofit under Title III. I will also include a sample writing you can use when you need to advocate under Title III. Although the sample I am including will be intended to be written, if you are more comfortable talking to someone about your rights under Title III, the sample text I have included could be used as talking points for you in a discussion that takes place over the phone or in-person. As always, I will include important links when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. If you have any questions or comments about this episode, you can feel free to reach me through the contact form at the Demand Our Access website, or you can email me at [email protected]. Recapping Title III Since this is intended to be a vrief recap of Title III, I am going to focus on which entities are covered by Title III and provide a quick reminder about surcharges. I have made the entities covered by Title III the focus of this brief review, because you need to understand which entities are covered by Title III prior to contacting a particular entity to advocate for rights. If you want to learn more about Title III, please check out Basics Under Title III and Basic Under Title III continued. Coverage General Provisions Title III covers: Places of public accommodation Commercial facilities Examination and courses related to applications, licensing, certification, or credentialing for secondary or postsecondary education, professional, or trade, purposes Title III also covers private entities primarily engaged in transporting people, but those regulations are produced by the Department of Transportation and will not be discussed in this episode. Public Accommodations The whole range of Title III requirements apply to entities the Department of Justice calls public accommodations. In order to be considered a public accommodation an entity must be private and it must own, lease, lease to, or operate a place of public accommodation. Defining a Place of Public Accommodation A place of public accommodation is a facility whose operations: Affect commerce And fall within one of the following 12 categories: Places of lodging (e.g., inns, hotels, motels) (except for owner-occupied establishments renting fewer than six rooms Establishments serving food or drink (e.g., restaurants and bars Places of exhibition or entertainment (e.g., motion picture houses, theaters, concert halls, stadiums Places of public gathering (e.g., auditoriums, convention centers, lecture halls Sales or rental establishments (e.g., bakeries, grocery stores, hardware stores, shopping centers Service establishments (e.g., laundromats, dry-cleaners, banks, barber shops, beauty shops, travel services, shoe repair services, funeral parlors, gas stations, offices of accountants or lawyers, pharmacies, insurance offices, professional offices of health care providers, hospitals Public transportation terminals, depots, or stations (not including facilities relating to air transportation Places of public display or collection (e.g., museums, libraries, galleries Places of recreation (e.g., parks, zoos, amusement parks Places of education (e.g., nursery schools, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private schools Social service center establishments (e.g., day care centers, senior citizen centers, homeless shelters, food banks, adoption agencies Places of exercise or recreation (e.g., gymnasiums, health spas, bowling alleys, golf courses In order to be a place of public accommodation, a business does not need to be expressly named in the above list; rather, it needs to fall within one of the 12 categories listed above. So, a sporting goods store is a place of accommodation under the sales and rentals category even though sporting goods stores aren’t directly mentioned in the above list of places of public accommodation. Commercial Landlords and Tenants Both landlords and tenants are responsible for following Title III. But the law allows landlords and tenants to contractually determine their rights and responsibilities under Title III. That being said, if your rights under Title III are violat

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, I am discussing paratransit. This episode will cover only topics related to how paratransit affects people with disabilities. I will not be covering any of the requirements that assist local governments in implementing their paratransit program. The information related to paratransit has been codified by the Department of Transportation (DOT) in 49 C.F.R § 37.121.133. The link in the episode notes goes to 37.121. You can use the Next button to navigate to each subsequent section. Alternatively, you can access the entirety of 49 C.F.R. § 37. If you access part 37, the sections related to paratransit are set forth in subsection F. The subsections are at the heading two level. So, you can find subsection F by navigating the page by the heading level two. Important Definitions The important definitions are set forth in 49 C.F.R. §37.3. Note, the definitions set forth in subsection 37.3 apply to the whole of part 37 (not just the paratransit requirements). I have included the link so you can check out the definitions on your own. If you want to learn more about terms I have not defined here, the definitions section is the place to go. Here are what I believe to be the important definitions related to paratransit. To make this easier to follow I have chosen to edit and/or summarize the definitions: Paratransit means comparable transportation service required by the ADA for individuals with disabilities who are unable to use fixed route transportation systems. A fixed route system is your local bus or train service that operates on a fixed schedule and has fixed routes. Commuter bus, commuter rail, or intercity rail systems are not fixed route systems. Oregin-to-destination means providing service from the place where a passenger is picked up and transporting them to their destination. Paratransit may be provided as either a curb-to-curb service or a door-to-door service. The choice is made by your local paratransit provider. When a paratransit provider chooses curb-to-curb service, it must generally provide additional assistance to passengers who need assistance beyond the curb to use paratransit. Nondiscrimination The nondiscrimination provisions are set forth in 49 C.F.R. § 37.5. I will cover two of them here: If paratransit is provided, you cannot be required to use it if you choose to use regular public transit. You cannot be required to be accompanied by an attendant. Paratransit Paratransit Eligibility The specific eligibility requirements related to paratransit are set forth in 49 C.F.R. § 37.123(e). I am not going to reproduce those here, because I suspect most people listening are eligible for paratransit. But there are a few things related to paratransit eligibility I want to mention: If an individual meets the eligibility criteria with respect to some trips but not others, the individual shall be paratransit eligible only for those trips for which they meet the criteria. A personn eligible for paratransit service can typically only take one additional person with them. If a person eligible for paratransit service has a personal care attendant, they can take their personal care attendant and one other person on the trip. A family member or friend traveling with a person eligible for paratransit service is not considered a personal care attendant unless they register as a personal care attendant. Additional individuals accompanying the paratransit eligible individual shall be provided service, provided that space is available for them on the paratransit vehicle carrying the paratransit eligible individual and that transportation of the additional individuals will not result in a denial of service to paratransit eligible individuals. In order to be considered "accompanying" someone who is eligible for paratransit service, the other individual(s) must be picked up and dropped off at the same place as the person who is eligible for paratransit service. The Process for Paratransit Eligibility Here are things to know about the process entities must use to determine paratransit eligibility: All information about the process, materials necessary to apply for eligibility, and notices and determinations concerning eligibility shall be made available in accessible formats upon request. If a decision has not been made within 21 days of an application being completed, the applicant shall be treated as eligible for paratransit service until or unless the application is denie

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In the nearly two years I have been working on the Demand Our Access Project, I have covered many different aspects of the law. As I have repeatedly said, I am doing the Demand Our Access project because I strongly believe the best way for those of us with disabilities to achieve more equitable outcomes in society is for us to understand and enforce the legal rights we have. So, it’s time for us to spend dedicated time discussing how to advocate for ourselves and our community by using the lega rights we do have to achieve better outcomes for us as individuals and for our community as a whole. This episode will be the first in a series of episodes where we discuss how to effectively advocate for better outcomes by using the legal rights we have covered in the previous episodes of Demand Our Access. Our first episode on advocating for our rights will cover state and local governments. Specifically, I’m going to go through the steps I take when I need to advocate for my civil rights with my state or local government. We are starting with state and local governments for three reasons: Those of us with disabilities have more protections when we face discrimination from a state or local government than we have when we face discrimination by a corporation. State and local governments are covered by Title II of the ADA (Title II), which was the first substantive topic I presented through the Demand Our Access project. Many in our community rely on state and local governments for critical services in ways they do not need to rely on corporations. Since basics under Title II of the ADA was covered nearly two years ago and because that episode didn’t expressly discuss accommodations and modifications under Title II, I’m going to briefly recap some of the rights afforded us under Title II. Then, I will move into the ways I advocate under Title II. I will include a sample request that I hope helps you understand how to make a request of a state or local government under Title II. Recapping Title II Since this is only a recap of our rights under Title II, I have chosen to cover only accommodations and modifications under Title II and effective communication under Title II. I have chosen these two topics because requests for accommodation and/or modification are how we get our rights under Title II and most requests for accommodation made under Title II relate to effective communication. This recap of our rights under Title II will not provide any citations to the law or Department of Justice guidance. To learn more about Title II, please check out the episode Title II Basics. Requests for Accommodation or Modification In putting together the Basics Under Title II episode, I decided not to cover requests for accommodation or modification. At the time, I believed people knew they had a right to request things of their local governments, and I didn’t want to make the episode any longer than it was already. Nearly two years later, I now believe that I need to provide people more exact language when helping them learn to get their rights met by state and local governments. The reason for my change of heart is simple: I have come to realize that the more knowledgeable you sound in your request the more likely you are to have your request effectively addressed. Requests for Modification I’m beginning with a discussion of modifications because they are more straightforward. When you request a modification, you are requesting a state or local government modify an existing policy, practice, or procedure to enable you as a disabled person to participate. Here are some examples of when you may need to request the modification of a policy, practice, or procedure from a state or local government: If a city has a policy that electric vehicles are not allowed in a park, someone using an assistive mobility device would have the right to have the policy modified so they can use their wheelchair in the park. If a state has a policy banning all animals from a museum, the handler of a service animal would need to request a modification to that policy allowing service animals to enter the museum. If a county has a policy requiring paper applications be completed by someone needing benefits, people with any number of disabilities would have the ability to request the policy be modified. Requests for Accommodation Requests for accommodation cover anything that does not involve the modificat

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal or financial advice. Applying the law and/or determining investment strategies depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal and/or financial advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal and/or financial advice. ABLE Accounts The Stephen Beck Jr. Achieving a Better Life Experience Act (ABLE Act) allows people with qualifying disabilities to establish tax-free financial accounts. I’m going to answer the questions I had about ABLE accounts when I began researching them. When I discovered what I am going to share with you, I couldn’t wait to create my own ABLE account. I will take the questions in the order I believe makes the most sense. If you have any comments about ABLE accounts, feel free to contact me at [email protected] or fill out the contact form on the Demand Our Access website. How do ABLE accounts affect Social Security Supplemental Income (SSI)? The most important thing about ABLE accounts for recipients of SSI to know is that the amount contained in your ABLE account up to $100,000 is exempt from SSI’s $2,000 asset limit. This means that a person on SSI can actually save some money and use ABLE account funds to pay qualifying expenses without being too concerned about an asset limit. If the beneficiary is getting SSI, they can’t have $100,000 in their ABLE account. If the value of an ABLE account reaches $100,000, the cash payments are stopped. As soon as the ABLE account is under $100,000, the beneficiary of the ABLE account can collect SSI payments without having to reapply for them. If I have an ABLE account, will I lose Medicaid? ABLE accounts (no matter how much they are worth) don’t impact Medicaid eligibility. Even if SSI cash payments are suspended because an ABLE account hit $100,000, health care covered by Medicaid won’t be lost. Will an ABLE account impact SNAP benefits? ABLE accounts are excluded from asset limits when someone applies for and/or gets SNAP benefits. How are ABLE accounts funded? Anyone can contribute to an ABLE account. Any money contributed to an ABLE account can’t be deducted from the contributor’s federal taxes. Some states do offer tax deductions for at least a portion if not the entire amount contributed to an ABLE account during the year. How much can be ConTributed to an ABLE Account Each Year? To keep this from getting too technical, I will tell you that generally the annual contribution to an ABLE account is limited to $18,000 for the 2024 calendar year. The amount that can be contributed annually is tied to the exclusion related to gift taxes. That means it will increase almost every year. The annual contribution limit covers every dollar contributed to the ABLE account during the year. So, if you contributed $10,000 of your own money and your mother contributed $8,000 your account would reach its annual $18,000 contribution limit for this year. There is an exception to the annual contribution limit for those people who do not have retirement plans through their work. Since that’s not a typical situation, I’m not covering it here. But you should be aware of the fact that if you do not have a retirement plan through work, you could contribute more to your ABLE account than the typical contribution limit. How can funds withdrawn from ABLE accounts be spent? Any funds withdrawn from an ABLE account must be spent on a qualified disability expense (QDE). Qualified disability expenses can be broken down into 12 broad categories: Education Housing Transportation Employment training and support Assistive technology and related services Health Prevention and wellness Financial management and administrative services Legal fees Expenses for ABLE account oversight and monitoring Funeral and burial Basic living expenses Housing Expenses Housing-related expenses that count as qualified disability expenses are broken down into nine broad categories: Mortgage payments (including insurance required by the mortgage holder) Property taxes Rent Heating fuel Gas Electricity Water Sewer Garbage removal If a withdrawal from an ABLE account is used to pay rent, the money withdrawn from the ABLE account must be paid toward rent in the month it was withdrawn from the account. Are funds withdrawn from an ABLE account taxed? As long as money withdrawn from an ABLE account is spent on a qualified disability expense, the withdrawn money passes to the beneficiary of the ABLE account free of federal income tax. Funds withdrawn from an ABLE account may be subject to state income taxes. Obviously, that depends on your state. How often can

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction This is the second part of our two-part look at Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title I). In the first episode dedicated to Title I, I covered important definitions under Title I. Some of the concepts discussed in this episode may be easier to understand if you have some familiarization with the material from the previous episode. Still, you should learn importnat things from this episode even if you did not review the previous episode. As I said last time, there is no way to cover this kind of material without using words like impaired that many of us in the disability community don’t use. I’m using words like impaired here because those are the words used in the law. Whether we like it or not, when communicating about the law we are required to use terms that are outdated. Maybe someday the ADA will be revisited and the updated law will provide for meaningful enforcement and will be written in modern language. For now, we have to discuss the law as it has been written. Our discussion is based on the rules defining compliance with Title I as set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in 29 C.F.R. § 29.1630. To make this presentation easier to follow, I’m not going to mention the exact citations to different sections of the Code of Federal Regulations. As always, I will link to the individual sections when this episode is posted to the Demand Our Access website. In listening to the previous episode, I decided that the term "covered entity", while used in the Code of Federal Regulations, may be too confusing for people just learning about Title I. So, I have decided to replace the term "covered entity" with the term "employer". While I’m doing this to make the presentation easier to follow, it must be remembered that not all employers are covered by Title I; for example, if an employer employs fewer than 15 employees that employer is not covered by Title I. Important Concepts Under Title I Discrimination Prohibited It is unlawful for an employer to discriminate on the basis of disability against a qualified individual in regard to the following: Recruitment, advertising, and job application procedures Hiring, upgrading, promotion, award of tenure, demotion, transfer, layoff, termination, right of return from layoff and rehiring Rates of pay or any other form of compensation and changes in compensation Job assignments, job classifications, organizational structures, position descriptions, lines of progression, and seniority lists Leaves of absence, sick leave, or any other leave Fringe benefits available by virtue of employment, whether or not administered by the employer Selection and financial support for training, including: apprenticeships, professional meetings, conferences and other related activities and selection for leaves of absence to pursue training Activities sponsored by an employer, including social and recreational programs Any other term, condition, or privilege of employment The term discrimination includes but is not limited to the acts described in 29 C.F.R. § 1630.4 through 29 C.F.R. § 1630.13. Even though I won’t mention those citations, I will now, hopefully, help you begin to become familiar with the types of disability discrimination discussed by the EEOC in those sections of the Code of Federal Regulations. Limiting, Classifying, and Segregating It is unlawful for an employer to limit, segregate, or classify a job applicant or employee in a way that adversely affects his or her employment opportunities or status on the basis of disability. Contractual or Other Arrangements It is unlawful for an employer to participate in a contractual or other arrangement or relationship that has the effect of subjecting the employer’s own qualified applicant or employee with a disability to the discrimination prohibited by Title I. Contractual or Other Relationship Defined The phrase contractual or other arrangement or relationship includes, but is not limited to, a relationship with an employment or referral agency, labor union (including collective bargaining agreements), an organization providing fringe benefits to an employee of the employer, or an organization providing training and apprenticeship programs. Application This section applies to an employer, with respect to its own applicants or employees, whether the entity offered the contract or initiated the relationship, or wheth

This episode is our first of at east two episodes dedicated to Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Title I is critical to those of us with disabilities, because it covers employment. This episode focuses on important definitions under Title I. Some of this will be review for those of you who reviewed the posts on Titles II and III. Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction During the month of January I will be covering employment of people with disabilities. Specifically, I will be covering the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’ (EEOC) regulations describing what compliance with Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act means. The rules on Title I compliance developed by the EEOC are set forth in 29 C.F.R. § 1630. To make this easier to follow, I’m not going to review all of the citations in this episode. As always, links to the information covered here will be provided on the Demand Our Access website in the show notes accompanying this episode. Given the amount of information in Title I compliance, I have divided the material up so it fits in two episodes. I’m also hoping that by leaving some time in both episodes there will be enough time for questions and comments. If you are not participating in the live version, you can email me at [email protected] with any questions or comments you may have. You can also fill out the contact form at Demand Our Access. Even though I don’t like the word "impairment" the reality is it is used in the law and every publication about the law. So, it is not possible to produce a presentation about Title I that doesn’t contain lots of uses of the word "impairment" and other words many of us with disabilities don’t use. I will not be covering every aspect of Title I. Specifically, I’m not going to cover things that largely or completely relate only to employers, drug abuse, and additional concepts that I don’t believe are relevant to most people with disabilities. Before getting into the material under Title I, I want to let you know that some of the material covered in this episode will be a review for those of you who have followed my presentations on Titles II and III. I’m repeating myself in areas like defining a disability so that people who have not reviewed the material on Titles II and III will get what they need from my coverage of Title I. That being said, I will be getting into concepts that are unique to Title I during this episode. If you have heard my presentations on titles II and III, there will be new information for you in this episode. Title I Important Things to Know For an employer to be covered byTitle I, it must have at least 15 employees. The United States government is not subject to the provisions of Title I; however, Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 provides similar protections for federal positions. Will be covering sections of the Rehabilitation Act later this year. To be clear, state and local governments are covered by Title I. If you work or you are interested in working for a state or local government, what I am covering here applies to you. Private membership clubs (excluding labor organizations) are not covered by Title I. Religious institutions are covered by Title I. but they may give preference to people of their religion. Members of the clergy and people perform essentially religious functions are excluded from the protections of Title I. Individuals with Disabilities Title I, like Titles II and III, protects three categories of individuals with disabilities: Individuals who have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities Individuals who have a record of a physical or mental impairment that substantially limited one or more of the individual’s major life activities Individuals who are regarded as having such an impairment, whether they have the impairment or not Physical or Mental Impairment Physical disabilities include: Physiological disorders Cosmetic disfigurement Anatomical loss affecting one or more critical body systems Mental disabilities include mental or psychological disorders, such as, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning disabilities. I’m not going to list any of the qualifying disabilities listed in the law because the ADA Amendments Act. of 2008 requires broad coverage. Substantial Limitation of a Major Life Activity An impairment su

In this episode I cover using Uber and Lyft with a disability. Although the focus of the episode is service animals, what is covered applies to other issues of disability discrimination too.

In this episode I demonstrate the Demand Our Access website to show people how to use it. I also recap our first year of Demand Our Access and look ahead to next year. This episode was recorded live during the live broadcast done on ACB Media. This version has been lightly edited from what happened live to make it a bit easier to follow. None of the substance has been changed.

The Episode In this episode, Desiree and I discuss a terrible experience we had with two moving companies while Desiree was moving to Oregon from Texas. We also discuss the rights parents with disabilities have to be accommodated by their children’s schools and provide tips in getting accommodations from schools.

Introduction In this episode, Desiree and I discuss filing complaints under Title III of the ADA (Title III). Specifically, we walk through filing a complaint with the Department of Justice against Chase bank because of the inaccessibility of its online mortgage services. This is the text of what Desiree and I filed with the Department of Justice against Chase bank. Note, this text is a bit different than what you will hear if you listen to the podcast. Even though this text is a bit different, the points made during the podcast are the same. Text of Our Complaint Against Chase My wife and I are both blind. We decided to use Chase for our mortgage. We chose Chase because their personal banking website and mobile app are reasonably accessible. We discovered Chase’s commitment to accessibility does not extend to its online mortgage services. Their mortgage portal to read and sign documents is almost entirely inaccessible. Neither my wife nor I was able to read any of the documents we needed to sign until we had already signed them. Eventually, we needed to find a different mortgage company. We couldn’t enter into a years-long mortgage based on documents we could not read until we signed indicating we had read and agreed with the terms. Prior to choosing another company, we tried several times, over email and phone, to get Chase to grant a reasonable accommodation for their inaccessible online mortgage services. Without my consent, Chase sent volumes of braille documents to my house. I did not want braille as an accommodation, because I didn’t want to read all of that in braille. Additionally, had I read all of the documents in braille I still would have been unable to sign them independently. Another issue with braille as an accommodation was the reality that Chase would not be able to regularly provide braille in a timely enough manner to enable us to place offers on homes. We needed an accommodation that would address the inaccessibility of the documents, our inability to easily sign the documents, and the timely nature of the mortgage process. Chase did not have a process in place that would enable me to speak with someone who understands the ADA and reasonable accommodations. The first accommodation they offered was to have me pay an attorney to read the documents to us. Due to our having to leave Chase, we suffered the following harms: our credit scores went down because the replacement mortgage company ran hard checks on our credit; we lost the money we would have gotten for using the real estate agent we found through Chase; and we lost days and dealt with lots of aggravation both in trying to address the lack of access provided by Chase and the need to begin the mortgage process from scratch. We may also wound up with a higher rate because of the time we lost when we should have been able to lock in a rate. I am filing this complaint because Chase, like many businesses, does not understand that all of their online services must be accessible. DOJ could do a lot to making web content covered under Title III accessible by holding a company like Chase accountable for the harm it causes by failing to make all of its online services . But Chase, because they promote their accessibility, is especially bad for not actually being accessible. We have dozens of emails to prove this complaint.

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Title III Continued General Requirements Under Title III Denial of Participation Under the ADA,, a person with a disability cannot be denied service simply because they have a disability. Equality in Participation The ADA mandates an equal opportunity to participate in or benefit from the goods and services offered by a place of public accommodation, but does not guarantee that an individual with a disability must achieve an identical result or level of achievement as persons without disabilities. A person who uses a wheelchair cannot be denied access to an exercise class because they cannot do all of the exercises. Separate Benefit and Integrated Setting The major principles behind the ADA’s efforts to provide people with disabilities access to mainstream opportunities are as follows: Individuals with disabilities must be integrated to the maximum extent appropriate. Separate programs are permitted where necessary to ensure equal opportunity. A separate program must be appropriate to the particular individual. Individuals with disabilities cannot be excluded from the regular program, or required to accept special services or benefits. Separate Programs A public accommodation may offer separate or special programs necessary to provide individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from the programs. Such programs must, however, be specifically designed to meet the needs of the individuals with disabilities for whom they are provided. Example Typically, an art museum does not allow patrons to touch exhibits. Working with a local affiliate of ACB, the art museum arranges a special tour for blind people where the touching of certain exhibits is allowed. Right to Participate in the Regular Program Even if a separate program is offered to people with disabilities, a public accommodation cannot deny people with disabilities the right to participate in the regular program, unless some other limitation on providing access exists. Example Even if a local ACB affiliate has arranged a special tour for blind people where the touching of some exhibits will be allowed, an art museum cannot force a blind person to take the separate tour. If the blind person wishes, they must be allowed to take any tour offered by the museum. Modifications in the Regular Program When a public accommodation offers a special program but a person with a disability chooses to participate in the regular program, the public accommodation is likely to have to provide modifications to the regular program to enable the person with a disability to participate. The fact that a separate program is offered may be a factor in determining the extent of the obligations under the regular program, but only if the separate program is appropriate to the needs of the particular individual with a disability. Discrimination Based on Association A public accommodation may not discriminate against individuals or entities because of their known relationship or association with persons who have disabilities. Retaliation or Coercion Individuals who exercise their rights under the ADA, or assist others in exercising their rights, are protected from retaliation. The prohibition against retaliation or coercion applies broadly to any individual or entity that seeks to prevent an individual from exercising his or her rights or to retaliate against him or her for having exercised those rights. Direct Threat A public accommodation may exclude an individual with a disability from participation in an activity, if that individual’s participation would result in a direct threat to the health or safety of others. The public accommodation must determine that there is a significant risk to others that cannot be eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level by reasonable modifications to the public accommodation’s policies, practices, or procedures or by the provision of appropriate auxiliary aids or services. The determination that a person poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others may not be based on generalizations or stereotypes about the effects of a particular disability; it must be based on an individual assessment that considers the particular activity and the actual abilities and disabilities of the individual. The individual assessment must be based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical evidence, or on the best available objective evidence, to determine – The nature, duration, and severity of the risk The

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction The Department of Justice (DOJ) has a page where you can read the entire text of the ADA, including the updates made to the law in 2008. Information about Title III can be found in a DOJ publication called Americans with Disabilities Act Title III Regulations. DOJ also published an ADA Title III Technical Assistance Manual that’s a bit outdated but still a good resource. I have linked to all of the resources referenced here in the post for this episode on the Demand Our Access website. I couldn’t possibly cover the entirety of Title III in one episode. So, I have chosen to omit subjects like commercial facilities, construction standards, and health insurance because those topics are too technical to cover as part of an overview of Title III. If you need information about those topics, the resources mentioned in this episode have good information. I’m not discussing service animals under Title III because I discussed it in the episode called Service Animals Under Titles II and III. Even though I don’t like the word "impairment" the reality is it is used in the law and every publication about the law. So, it is not possible to produce a presentation about Title III that doesn’t contain lots of uses of the word "impairment" and other words many of us with disabilities don’t use. Unlike in previous episodes, I’m not going to include specific citations to the Code of Federal Regulations. I’m leaving out those citations to try and make the material easier to follow and understand. The trade off will be that I’m not going to provide direct citations you can use to check my work and learn more than I can cover. But all of the citations to relevant sections in the Code of Federal Regulations can be accessed through the resources I have linked to in this episode. If anyone is willing, I would appreciate feedback as to whether you like this kind of information presented with or without citations. Title III Coverage General Provisions Title III covers: Places of public accommodation Commercial facilities Examination and courses related to applications, licensing, certification, or credentialing for secondary or postsecondary education, professional, or trade, purposes Title III also covers private entities primarily engaged in transporting people, but those regulations are produced by the Department of Transportation and will not be discussed in this episode. Public Accommodations The whole range of Title III requirements apply to entities the Department of Justice calls public accommodations. In order to be considered a public accommodation an entity must be private and it must own, lease, lease to, or operate a place of public accommodation. Defining a Place of Public Accommodation A place of public accommodation is a facility whose operations: Affect commerce And fall within one of the following 12 categories: Places of lodging (e.g., inns, hotels, motels) (except for owner-occupied establishments renting fewer than six rooms Establishments serving food or drink (e.g., restaurants and bars Places of exhibition or entertainment (e.g., motion picture houses, theaters, concert halls, stadiums Places of public gathering (e.g., auditoriums, convention centers, lecture halls Sales or rental establishments (e.g., bakeries, grocery stores, hardware stores, shopping centers Service establishments (e.g., laundromats, dry-cleaners, banks, barber shops, beauty shops, travel services, shoe repair services, funeral parlors, gas stations, offices of accountants or lawyers, pharmacies, insurance offices, professional offices of health care providers, hospitals Public transportation terminals, depots, or stations (not including facilities relating to air transportation Places of public display or collection (e.g., museums, libraries, galleries Places of recreation (e.g., parks, zoos, amusement parks Places of education (e.g., nursery schools, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private schools Social service center establishments (e.g., day care centers, senior citizen centers, homeless shelters, food banks, adoption agencies Places of exercise or recreation (e.g., gymnasiums, health spas, bowling alleys, golf courses In order to be a place of public accommodation, a business does not need to be expressly named in the above list; rather, it needs to fall within one of the 12 categories listed above. So, a sporting goods store is a place of

Episode Information This episode is a demonstration of me commenting on the Department of Justice’s proposed rule on web accessibility under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you’re interested in commenting, please visit this page on Regulations.gov. Note, comments must be submitted by midnight EDT on October third. If you comment, I would love to hear from you. If you’re interested, we may even be able to discuss your comments on the live version of the podcast broadcast on ACB Community. The Comment Submitted During the Episode Here is the text of the comment I submitted during the demonstration of the process for commenting on the proposed rule for web accessibility under Title II. The final rule must ensure that state and local governments understand that adding so-called accessibility overlays does not mean sites and/or pages comply with the rule or result in accessible websites. As a blind person who navigates the web with a screen reader, I hate websites that use so-called accessibility overlays. They don’t work well. They make everything load slower. They don’t behave consistently. They have different levels of capability. Most importantly they give site owners and creators the false idea that their site is accessible. Overlays do not ensure PDFs, PowerPoints, visual representations, and more ways of providing information on the web are accessible when that information is uploaded to websites as downloadable content or content designed to open in another window or tab. Overlays also do nothing about third-party portals and other external content that state and local governments require you to use to access their activities, programs, and services. My water company has a so-called accessibility overlay on their site. I can’t pay my bill online without guessing at where information is to be entered because the third-party portal they use is not accessible. I find their payment portal so aggravating that I call to pay my bill and sacrifice the convenience of online payment options available to their customers who do not use screen readers. When I encounter a site with a so-called accessibility overlay, I know the site’s owners and creators aren’t really interested in providing me as a disabled person the integrated web experience mandated by Title II. Unless the final rule clarifies that so-called accessibility overlays do not provide compliance, I’m afraid many state and local governments will use overlays instead of doing what the law expects and updating their sites so that those of us with disabilities have the same integrated user experience as do people without disabilities. In the process, many more aspects of doing business with local governments may become more inaccessible or fail to result in the accessibility changes hoped for through the promulgation of this rule.

Note on This Recording Thanks to technical difficulties, this episode was recorded from the live version of the podcast played on ACB Community. So, it could not be edited to the usual standards of the episodes presented here. Still, the information is accurate and useful. ! Section 508 Here are a few things in Section 508 that should be kept in mind.. Section 508 applies to information and communication technology (ICT) procured, maintained, developed, or used by federal agencies covered by Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1934 as implemented by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). When Section 508 is updated, the law mandates the updated or revised standards be incorporated in procurement processes within six months of adoption. Section 508 applies to covered hardware, software, electronic content, and support documentation. Under Section 508, all covered web and non-web content and software—including websites, intranets, Word documents, PDFs, and project management software is largely required to conform to WCAG 2.0 levels A and AA. Section 508 covers all external content and the following nine categories of internal content: emergency notifications decisions related to administrative claims or proceedings an internal or external program or policy announcement a notice of benefits, program eligibility, employment opportunity, or personnel action a formal acknowledgement of receipt survey questionnaires a template or form educational or training materials or intranet content designed as a web page. Agencies had one year from adoption of the revised standards to comply. A safe harbor provision means that ICT that complied with the previous version of Section 508 guidelines complies with the existing version of Section 508 unless the ICT is altered. Alterations are considered on an element-by-element basis to determine whether an alteration triggers a need to comply with the revised Section 508 guidelines. Where ICT conforming to one or more of the Section 508 standards is not commercially available, the agency shall procure the ICT that best meets the revised 508 standards consistent with the agency’s business needs. The responsible agency official shall document in writing: (a) the non-availability of conforming ICT, including a description of market research performed and which provisions cannot be met, and (b) the basis for determining that the ICT to be procured best meets the requirements in the Revised 508 Standards consistent with the agency’s business needs. Where ICT that fully conforms to the Revised 508 Standards is not commercially available, the agency shall provide individuals with disabilities access to and use of information and data by an alternative means that meets identified needs. Non-Web documents do not have to comply with the following four WCAG success criteria. : Bypass Blocks; Multiple Ways; Consistent Navigation; and Consistent Identification. Exceptions Under Section 508 Section E202 of Section 508 lists the five general exceptions to section 508: Legacy ICT National security systems Federal contracts ICT functions located in maintenance or monitoring spaces The Section 508 website has information about the five general exceptions plus the best meets exception and the undue burden or fundamental alteration defenses to compliance.

Proposed Rule Introduction to the Rule On July 25, 2023, the Department of Justice (DOJ) released a proposed rule that if adopted would clarify what state and local governments must do to have their web content be considered compliant with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title II). You can read the entire proposed rule and comment on it at Regulations.gov. Comments must be received by midnight EDT on October third. If you’re only interested in the highlights, you can read a fact sheet about the proposed rule published by DOJ. compliance Standard and covered Content Would make version 2.1 Level AA of the Web Content Accessibility guidelines (WCAG) the compliance standard under Title II Would apply to web content that a state or local government makes available to the public or to offer activities, programs, and services to the public Applies to mobile apps made available to the public or used to offer activities, programs, and services to the public Exceptions The proposed rule contains six exceptions. In most instances, content meeting one of the exceptions would not need to be automatically made accessible. Archived Web Content Web content meeting all three of the following factors would not need to comply with WCAG: The content is maintained only for research, reference, or record keeping. The content is kept in a special area for archived content. The content has not been changed since being archived. Preexisting Conventional Electronic Documents Web or mobile content meeting both of the following requirements would not need to automatically comply with WCAG. The documents are in certain file formats specified in the proposed rule, like word processing, presentation, PDF, or spreadsheet files. are available on the state or local government’s website or mobile app before the date the state or local government will have to comply with the rule (after the rule is finalized). This exception would not apply if the preexisting document is currently being used by the state or local government to provide information or to enable participation in an activity, program, or service of the state or local government; for example, an online PDF form created in 2021 enabling people to request tax statements would need to comply with WCAG even though it would have been created prior to the rule taking affect. Content Posted by a Third Party Web content posted on a state or local government’s website by a member of the public or that is otherwise out of the control of the state or local government would not need to comply with WCAG. States and local governments would not need to ensure all messages posted to their website by the public comply with WCAG. But if someone with a disability requests access to content that did not comply with WCAG, the state or local government would generally have to provide access to that information. Linked Third Party Content If a state or local government links to third party content on an external website, the state or local government would not need to ensure the content on the external site complies with WCAG. If a town links to local businesses, it would not need to ensure the web content of the local businesses complies with WCAG. But if the town links to an external website to provide information or to allow people to access activities, programs, or services offered by the town, the town must ensure that the third party web content complies with WCAG. If a town contracts with a vendor to allow for the processing of credit card payments, the town would need to ensure the third party credit card processor complies with WCAG. Public School’s Password Protected Content Password-protected content associated with specific classes or courses generally would not need to comply with WCAG. The exception would not apply under either of the following two circumstances: A student needing accessible content is enrolled in a class A student is enrolled in a class and their parent has a disability resulting in the parent needing accessible materials Individualized Documents That are Password Protected Web content meeting all three of the following factors would not need to comply with WCAG: The content is in certain file formats, like word processing, presentation, PDF, or spreadsheet files Files are about a specific person, property, or account Files are password protected If a city provides PDF versions of individual water bills through its website, all of the individual water bills would not need to comply with WCAG. If someone with a disability requests their individual water bill be provided accessibly their individual water bill would need to comply with WCAG. Proposed Times for Compliance If the rule is adopted with its current dates for compliance, state and local governments will have different amounts of time to comply depending on their population. Local governments with a population of less than 50,000 would have three years from the rule’s adopti

Introduction Before giving a brief history of WCAG and describing its technical components at a very high, hopefully easy to follow level, I’m going to discuss what I believe is the most important thing people need to know about the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines–the reality that their development is inequitable and largely excludes people with disabilities. I’m beginning with the lack of equity involved in the WCAG development process, because I’m hoping folks will consider what our lack of involvement in the technical aspects really mean for our odds of using WCAG to create a web that’s truly accessible to us. WCAG’s Lack of Equity I covered this at the end of a previous live version of the podcast, but it needs to be restated here. The process of developing the WCAG is not at all equitable or inclusive of members of the disability community. The WCAG is developed by the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). Specifically, the development of WCAG is done by the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. The current chairs of the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group are Charles Adams (Oracle), Rachael Bradley Montgomery (Library of Congress), and Alastair Campbell (Nomensa a British company). As far as I can tell, and I have looked reasonably hard, none of the three is a user of assistive technologies. All of them describe themself as working on accessibility, in the field of accessibility, and/or advocating for accessibility for periods of years. I can’t find one mention of any of them discussing their life as a person with a disability, describing how they use assistive technologies, or commenting about how they are personally impacted by inaccessibility. I mentioned the employers of the chairs of the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group because the Working Group is an organization that for all intents and purposes only allows other organizations to join as full members. This means that an individual (regardless of their disability status, knowledge of assistive technologies, web codes, and related tools) cannot join without an invitation unless their employer pays to be an organizational member or they are able to pay thousands of dollars to join as an individual. The Membership FAQ has lots of information about joining the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. The fees for joining the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group highlight the elitist, restrictive, inequitable nature of the WCAG development process. The current cheapest fee for joining, in the United States available to very small nonprofits and government agencies, is $7,900 Annually. The largest annual fee for a United States business is currently more than $77,000 annually. As the FAQ about the membership process and the fee structure for joining the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group indicate, the development of WCAG and the leadership of that development is a process that the vast majority of the disabled community cannot participate in at all. to make matters worse, the only people with a real shot at membership and the right to true participation are people who gain entrance in the organization with the permission of their employer. This structure creates an obvious conflict of interest forcing people to, at minimum, represent the wishes of their employer if they want to continue participating. So, the structure effectively guarantees very few people with disabilities will have an actual say in decision making and that the guidelines reflect the wishes of the business community–not the disability community. To pretend it welcomes participation and to offer a largely false nod to equity and inclusion, the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group does offer different ways for members of the public to comment. But as you have heard me say repeatedly on this podcast, the most important concept of disability equity is nothing about us without us. By using a process that effectively prevents people with disabilities, unless they are representing their employer’s interest, from having a voting say in the development of WCAG, the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) has created a process that is all about those of us with disabilities while largely preventing those of us with disabilities from meaningful participation and denying us a real chance to lead efforts reporting to make web content more accessible to us. Basics of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are developed by the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), a division of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). W3C is a web standards organization founded in 1994 which develops interoperable technologies (specifications, guidelines, software, and tools) to lead the Web to its full potential. The W3c is directed by Sir Tim Berners-Lee, who invented the World Wide Web in 1989. Version 1.0 of WCAG was officially released on May 5 1999. Version 2.0 of WCAG was released on December 11

Introduction It is impossible to discuss disability justice without referencing American politics and American history. People have very different views of many aspects of American politics. Most people don’t really know American history. So, it will be impossible to discuss disability justice in a meaningful way and not make some folks feel uncomfortable. I say that to preface the truth that much of what I’m sharing here is my personal opinion. I have strong reasons for having the opinions I have, but I appreciate and recognize that some will disagree with me. Even if you disagree with me, I hope you will listen to me, not simply hear what I’m saying. To help you, even if we disagree, understand why I have the views I have, I’m going to share a bit about myself throughout this episode. Important Facts About Me I want to share a few things about me so I can refer to them later: As I hope most of you know, I was born blind. I’m a white male. I’m 49 years old. I grew up in a middle class home. I graduated from college and law school. I’m a lawyer by trade. I’m a homeowner. I earn a solid middle class salary. As a person with a disability, I face discrimination and oppression on a daily basis. As a white male, I am privileged on a daily basis. As a well-educated member of the middle class, I’m privileged on a daily basis. As a heterosexual male, I’m privileged on a daily basis. Disability Justice The 10 principles of disability justice were created in 2005 by a group called Sins Invalid. Here is a little of how Sins Invalid is described on their website: Sins Invalid is a disability justice-based performance project that incubates and celebrates artists with disabilities, centralizing artists of color and LGBTQ / gender-variant artists as communities who have been historically marginalized. Led by disabled people of color, Sins Invalid’s performance work explores the themes of sexuality, embodiment and the disabled body, developing provocative work where paradigms of “normal” and “sexy” are challenged, offering instead a vision of beauty and sexuality inclusive of all bodies and communities. There are now several versions of the 10 principles of disability justice. Since they all present the same ideas and to keep this a bit shorter, I have lightly edited the 10 principles. The light editing I have done also means I have eliminated a lot of explanatory information so I could cover it a bit differently or to save time. The 10 principles of disability justice are as follows: Intersectionality: We are all many things, and they all impact us. Leadership of those most impacted: When we talk about ableism, racism, sexism, and more we are led by those who most know these systems. Anti capitalist politic: In an economy that sees land and humans as components of profit, we are anti capitalist by the nature of having nonconforming bodies and/or minds. Commitment to cross-movement organizing: Shifting how social justice movements understand disability and contextualize ableism, disability justice lends itself to politics of alliance. Recognizing wholeness: People have inherent worth outside of commodity relations and capitalist notions of productivity. Each person is full of history and life experience. Sustainability: We pace ourselves, individually and collectively, to be sustained long term. Our embodied experiences guide us toward ongoing justice and liberation. Commitment to cross-disability solidarity: We honor the insights and participation of all of our community members, knowing that isolation undermines collective liberation. Interdependence: We meet each other’s needs as we build toward liberation, knowing that state solutions inevitably extend into further control over lives. Collective access: As brown, black and queer-bodied disabled people we bring flexibility and creative nuance that go beyond able-bodied/minded normativity, to be in community with each other. Collective liberation: No body or mind can be left behind—only by moving together can we accomplish the revolution we require. I want to discuss a few of the 10 principles of disability justice individually. Again, what I will say here are my opinions and are expressions of what the 10 principles of disability justice say to me. Intersectionality Intersectionality is a concept invented by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989 to describe how race, sex, class, and other characteristics intersect with one another and overlap. For more than 20 years after Professor Crenshaw coined the term intersectionality, it remained an obscure term rarely heard beyond legal and philosophical discussions. Over the last decade, intersectionality has become a cultural and political lightning rod as some folks fight for more equity and others fight to maintain the status quo. But when you think about it, intersectionality makes sense. Everyone is a whole bunch of things. The more things any person has that are different from the traits of those with the most power, the more discri

Introduction During our last episode of Demand Our Access, we had a brief discussion of disability equity and disability justice. Since so much of how I see the ADA and the other laws we have and will cover through the Demand Our Access project is influenced by how I view disability equity and disability justice, I decided we should discuss those important concepts in this space. Since Disability equity and disability justice are both heavy topics, I have decided to split them into separate episodes. I’m hoping that by splitting them, there will be time for some thoughtful discussion. So, this episode will focus on disability equity. Nothing About us Without Us Nothing about us without us is a critical piece of disability equity. It means nothing that really impacts the disability community should happen without input from people with disabilities. I would add to the concept of nothing about us without us and say that nothing really impacting the disability community should be decided by people without disabilities. Equality and Equity Equality means each person and group of individuals is given the same amount of resources and has the same opportunities. Equity recognizes that each person or group of individuals has unique circumstances and allocates exact resources and opportunities necessary to provide for equal outcomes. Examples of Equality A school district spends $20,000 per student. A government holds a public meeting and provides everyone in attendance the same print agenda and meeting materials. A bank offers all of its customers the opportunity to use an app to pay bills. Under each of the three above examples, everyone is supposedly being treated exactly the same. Everyone has been provided the same resources. Everyone has been afforded the same opportunities. In these three examples, the school district, government, and bank are not making any allowances for the unique circumstances of different communities. Examples of Equity A school district spends $25,000 per student in schools where more children are living in poverty and $15,000 per student in school districts where families are wealthy. A government holds a public meeting in an accessible venue and provides the agenda and meeting materials in print, large print, and accessible electronic formats. A bank allows all customers to pay bills through an app it has developed to be accessible to users of assistive technologies. In these three examples, the school district, government, and bank took steps to recognize that not all people have the same circumstances. Here, these entities understood that simply providing everyone what on the surface seems like the same resource and opportunity actually disadvantages many people. The school district recognized that wealthy families could do more for their children than families living in poverty and provided certain schools more money to help reduce the funding disparities that have always existed in schools located in neighborhoods that aren’t wealthy. The government spent additional money ensuring the venue was accessible to people with mobility disabilities and to provide materials in alternative formats. The bank spent additional money having its app coded for accessibility and having the app tested by native users of assistive technologies to ensure they have the same usability experience as those who don’t use assistive technologies. Summing up Equality and Equity As you have seen, equality ignores the reality that society has always treated people differently. Equity, on the other hand, recognizes the reality of ongoing oppression and requires additional resources and opportunities be provided to historically oppressed communities to provide more equitable outcomes. The key thing to remember about the equality verses equity debate is that equity focuses on the outcomes produced, not just the resources provided. For our purposes, a societal focus on disability equity instead of equality would force society to admit that people with disabilities are far more likely to live in poverty, be undereducated, and unemployed or underemployed than are people without disabilities. In an equitable society, we would realize that striving for equality of resources and opportunities is simply not working. In an equitable society, we would realize that to make up for the centuries of discrimination and oppression faced by disabled people, government would have to direct far more resources to the disabled community and deliberately provide additional opportunities to the disabled community. In my view, America would be a far better society had the Fourteenth Amendment been designed to ensure equitable outcomes under the law than equality of opportunity under the law. A focus on equitable outcomes would have forced us to honestly examine and reckon with the lack of similar outcomes so often afforded people of color, people with disabilities, women, and more. Ableism Ableism is the intentional or unintentional d

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Titles II and III As a reminder, Title II of the ADA largely applies to state and local governments. So, all cities, counties, towns, multijurisdictional governmental bodies, and their agencies, bureaus, and departments are covered by Title II. Title III applies to what the law calls places of public accommodation. For our purposes, we are talking about businesses and most nonprofits. So, restaurants, hotels, concert halls, sports arenas, stores, and rideshare companies are covered by Title III. Introduction Under Titles II and III of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), covered entities are required to provide effective communication to people with disabilities. Effective communication means communication between the covered entity and a person with a disability is as effective as is communication between the covered entity and a person who does not have a disability. The law expects that a person with a disability can: communicate with; receive information from; and convey information to covered entities. The Department of Justice (DOJ) rule on effective communication focuses on people with visual, hearing, and speech disabilities. But issues of effective communication can also arise when communication involves people with learning disabilities that impact reading and/or writing. Subsequent sections of this episode will provide the legal nuts and bolts of effective communication as applicable to entities covered by Titles II and III and outlined by DOJ. The general aspects of compliance with the effective communication requirement under Title II are set forth in 28 C.F.R. § 35.160-164. The requirements for places of public accommodation to provide auxiliary aides and services under Title III are covered in 28 C.F.R § 36.303. The DOJ guide on effective communication under Titles II and III has a lot of resources on the responsibilities of covered entities to effectively communicate with people with disabilities. The requirements to effectively communicate are very similar under both Titles II and III. So, the rest of this episode will largely be about how title II entities are supposed to effectively communicate with those of us with disabilities. Where the rules are different under Title III, I will mention those differences as we move through the material. Requesting Alternative Methods of Communication Under 28 C.F.R. § 35.106, Title II entities must notify people with disabilities of how they can request alternative methods of communication. This means every local government website must clearly present contact information for someone charged with granting accommodations to people with disabilities (including those related to effective communication). Usually, local governments satisfy the notice of rights requirement by adopting a meaningful access statement covering many forms of discrimination. Some entities will adopt a more specific notice of rights applying only to public rights under Title II. Also, every event notice should clearly designate which person on the event planning team will coordinate accommodations for the event and list that person’s contact information. Title III entities are not required to provide notice as to how people with disabilities can request accommodations. This is a serious weakness in the ADA. I’m sure most of you know how hard it can be to get help when you go to a store or need service from a business. Companions Covered by the ADA In many instances, covered entities may communicate with a person the law calls a companion of the person needing their goods or services; for example, parents often talk with schools about the participation of children in school events. In cases like these, the parent, if they have a disability, is covered as a companion of their student. When a parent with a disability is talking with a school about their child’s education, the disabled parent is entitled to reasonable accommodations. I used this example, because I have seen several instances of schools telling parents they only need to accommodate students with disabilities. That is fundamentally wrong. All public schools are covered by Title II. Private schools, unless they are directly operated by religious institutions, are covered by Title III. If you are a disabled parent, you are in most cases covered as a companion of your child, and you have a right to accommodations. Do not allow your child’s school to tell you they do not need to accommodate you.

Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Introduction In this episode, we will discuss service animals under Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. We covered service animals under the Air Carrier Access Act in the episode titled About the Air Carrier Access Act. We will cover service animals under the Fair Housing Act when we discuss the Fair Housing Act. Service Animals Under Titles II and III The information covered in this section of the episode is based on two documents from the Department of Justice (DOJ). The document titled Service Animals has lots of information as to how Titles II and III cover service animals. The document titled FAQs About Service Animals and the ADA answers more than 30 questions you may have about service animals under Titles II and III. Definition of a Service Animal A service animal is defined as a dog that has been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for an individual with a disability. The task(s) performed by the dog must be directly related to the person’s disability. Performing work and Doing Tasks The dog must be trained to take a specific action when needed to assist the person with a disability. Examples of work or tasks service animals do include but are not limited to the following: Guiding a blind person Alerting a person with diabetes when their blood sugar is too low Notifying someone with depression that it’s time for them to take their medication Indicating to a person with epilepsy prior to the onset of a seizure and help them remain safe Emotional Support Animals Dogs providing strictly emotional support, comfort, therapy, or companionship are not considered service animals under Titles II and III. Some state and local governments have passed laws allowing emotional support animals into public places. If you have an emotional support animal, check with your local government to see if it has such a law and to find out what it allows and requires. Psychiatric Service Animals Although animals providing strictly emotional support are not covered under Titles II and III, service animals trained to do work or complete tasks related to a disability are covered under Titles II and III; for example, if an animal has been trained to understand when its handler is having anxiety, and to take certain action(s) to lessen the seriousness of the attack, the animal qualifies as a service animal under Titles II and III. Training Service Animals A person is not required to have their service animal trained by a professional organization. Service animals in training, whether being trained by a private person or a professional organization, are not legally considered service animals. Questions Covered Entities can Ask When a covered entity has questions as to whether a particular dog qualifies as a service animal, it is only allowed to ask two questions: Is the service animal required because of a disability? What work or task has the dog been trained to perform? They cannot ask for any documentation related to the dog, require that the dog demonstrate the task it has been trained to perform, or ask about the nature of your disability. General Points The ADA does not require service animals to wear a specific harness, vest, or ID tag. The handler is responsible for caring for and supervising the service animal. This includes, feeding, toileting, grooming, and veterinary care. Service animals are allowed in salad bars and other self-service food lines. Service animals are allowed in communal food areas similar to those that may be found in dormitories or shelters. Hotels cannot assign certain rooms to handlers of service animals. People with disabilities must have the same opportunity to reserve any room that could be reserved by someone without a disability. Hotels cannot charge a cleaning fee for service animals; however, if a service animal damages a room, the hotel can charge for that damage. A person with a disability may use more than one service animal at the same time. In those cases, both service animals are entitled to the same access. If the space in question (like a small crowded restaurant) cannot accommodate both service animals, the restaurant can ask that one service animal be left outside. Hospitals must allow in-patients to keep their service animal in their room. If a patient’s medical condition prevents them from caring for their service animal, the hospital must allow them to make arrangements to ha

n this episode, we are filing our first complaint. Join by Desiree Sturdevant, we file a complaint with the Department of Transportation under the Air Carrier Access Act against Alaska Airlines. This episode was recorded in two sessions. So, the audio levels are not quite the same.

About Me This will be the last time I begin an episode with information about me. I’m sharing this information at the beginning of the first three episodes so you can learn a little about me and my qualifications to present on matters of disability law. Basic Bio I was born blind. I am a member of the American Council of the Blind. I live in Portland, Oregon. Oregon is the fifth state I have called home. My interests include: I love animals. I’m a huge sports fan. I’m an avid reader and writer. Certifications I have a law license from Massachusetts. I’m a certified ADA coordinator. I’m a certified professional in accessibility. Professional Background I’m the disability analyst for Portland Parks & Recreation. Previously, I was the ADA Title II analyst for the city of Portland. Several years ago, I was a contract attorney for Disability Rights Advocates in Berkeley, California. Prior to that I was a staff attorney for what was then called the American Bar Association’s Commission on Mental and Physical Disability Law in Washington, DC. Disclaimer The information presented in any of the Demand Our Access podcast episodes, on the Demand Our Access website, or otherwise shared in conjunction with or through association with the Demand Our Access project is expressly not individual legal advice. Applying the law depends on the circumstances and events that comprise every situation. Since legal advice is fact-specific, nothing about the Demand Our Access project can provide an individual, a group of individuals, or any organization legal advice. Roadmap In this episode we will be focusing on the following: Airline Passengers with Disabilities Bill of Rights Selected provisions of the Air Carrier Access Act Introduction This episode is designed to provide a good amount of knowledge of our rights as airline passengers with disabilities. It is not intended to address every requirement the airlines have to provide us, nor is it going to address every aspect of discrimination we may face as people with disabilities when we travel by air. My hope is that by providing this information I can help others in our community understand the rights we have, how to make those rights work for us when we can, and what changes to the law we should be demanding. If you want more information about the topics presented here, or you think you may need information not presented here, the show notes accompanying this episode and posted to the website has links to all of the resources covered here. So, I wouldn’t listen to this podcast expecting to take notes; rather, I would listen to gain an understanding of what is generally required. When you are planning a trip, or you are thinking about filing a complaint, use the website to access information applying to your specific situation. Airline Passengers with Disabilities Bill of Rights The Airline Passengers with Disabilities Bill of Rights (Bill of Rights) was developed by the Department of Transportation (DOT) as a cleaner way of explaining the rights promised people with disabilities in the Air Carrier Access Act (ACA). The Bill of rights makes the following 10 promises: The right to be treated with dignity and respect The right to receive information about airline services, and aircraft services, capabilities, and limitations The right to receive information in an accessible format The right to accessible airport facilities The right to assistance at airports The right to assistance on the aircraft The right to travel with an assistive device or service animal The right to seating accommodations The right to accessible aircraft features The right to resolution of a disability related issue While the rest of this episode will cover provisions of the ACA, the Bill of Rights is a great place for you to begin learning about your rights under the ACA. Selected Provisions of the ACA Effective Communication Website Accessibility The accessibility of airline websites is discussed in 14 C.F.R. § 382.43. Some of its key provisions are as follows: If an airline flies at least one plane with 60 or more seats, that airline’s primary website had to be accessible by December 12, 2016. If an airline’s primary website is covered, it must comply with level AA of version 2.0 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. The pages on the primary websites were to be tested by people with disabilities and/or disability organizations for compliance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines and for the usability of the pages. Consulting by the disability community was to be done prior to the scheduled dates for compliance. There is no requirement for ongoing, organized testing of web pages. If someone acknowledging their disability says they cannot access something on an airline’s website, the airline needs to accommodate them in another way. Airline websites must allow people with disabilities to request accommodations for future fli

In episode two we begin discussing key concepts under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act including: notice of rights, complaints; and ADA coordinators. This link goes to the PDF for episode two. The PDF has all of the most important information discussed in the episode.

Welcome to the first episode of the Demand Our Access podcast. In this episode, I will describe the podcast, the website for the show, and briefly discuss basics of the Americans with Disabilities Act.