XX (b)(6) Kingston, NY XX June 8, 1993 XX The Honorable Daniel Patrick Moynihan The Russel Building Room 464 Washington D.C. 20510 Dear Sir, It has come to my attention that although there laws on the books that require public buildings to be accessible for persons with disabilities, the enforcement of these laws leaves much to be desired. In fact, it leaves everything to be desired as they are hardly enforced at all. Having XX who must use a wheelchair which makes it difficult if not impossible to gain access to many public buildings, I feel very strongly that something must be done to increase enforcement of these laws. According to the Americans With Disabilities Act: Title III Sec 12182. Prohibition of discrimination by public accommodations subsection a) General rule, "No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation." Apparently, the owners of many public facilities, especially in the greater Kingston, N.Y area have not been informed of this fact. Sadly, I can speak from first-hand experience of many public buildings which are completely inaccessible by disabled persons, and the owners of these facilities have no intention of coming up to par on this law, because the authorities seem to let this behavior slide. It is a sad time in America when a business will knowingly discriminate against individuals with disabilities because they know that they won't lose enough money due to boycotts, and that the authorities will do nothing to remedy the situation. For example. The Hudson Valley Mall, in Ulster, NY, has doors that are so heavy that "normal" people have trouble opening them. Imagine trying to open such a door while confined to a wheelchair with the limitations in movement that come with this. True, a person in a wheelchair could get someone else to open said door, but the word "accessible" implies that an individual can use or operate a device without outside help. Remarkably, these doors passed inspection and were allowed. When the mall added a new section, these same doors were again installed. The mall authorities were asked by the Resource Center for Accessible Living if they would consider installing electric doors that would he much easier for disabled persons to use. The answer was a resounding Is no". The rationale used was that teenagers who frequent the mall would use these doors as a source of entertainment by continually opening and closing these doors. Speaking as a teen, I must say that neither myself nor my friends would do anything of the sort, despite the obvious temptation. True, electric doors are much more fun than a video arcade any day, but I think that we would be able to control ourselves. The I.B.M. plant in Kingston as well as other retail stores such as Caldor and various supermarkets have installed these doors, and I can't recall often hearing teenagers discussing hanging out at these locations in order to play with the doors. Another example is the Kingston High School's MJM Building. A few years back, the school board was allotted money by the district to make the building accessible for the disabled. However, the district decided to spend the money elsewhere. I am aware of the regulation in the ADA Guidelines that states that all buildings under three stories do not have to modify themselves to meet the standards of the law, but isn't it ridiculous when a disabled child can't be mainstreamed into society because the school would rather build a baseball field? This kind of thinking keeps the stereotypes about the disabled alive, that they can't be active members of society because their bodies cannot always respond to their brains, which happen to work as well as anyone (b)(6) else's. As an example, my XX has had XX hip revisions XX is currently serving as a XX and XX for the Town of Kingston. I can understand that smaller businesses cannot afford modifications, but what's to stop larger companies from simply renting smaller office buildings so that they don't have to spend money to flaunt the law? Perhaps this law should use income, and not building size as a cutoff for determining accessibility. Also, the school board itself meets on the second floor of it's office building. Since there is no elevator in this building (as it's under three stories tall), this seems to me to be a convenient way for the board to not have to deal with the problem, as no one confined to a wheelchair or walker can complain about conditions since they can't attend school board meetings anyway. A third, and particularly sad, example is the case of a local doctor in Kingston. This man (who will remain nameless) refuses to build a ramp to his office although most of his patients have physical disabilities, as he is a practicing neurologist. He has told his patients that he will meet them at the hospital if they can't get in to the building, but this goes against the ADA on two counts. First, it is discriminatory against people confined to wheelchairs or walkers, and secondly, it is extremely difficult to find parking in the middle of the city that a disabled person can use which is close to the doors so that it is easier for the disabled person to get inside. Is money so important now to the medical profession that they won't spend money to make life a little easier for the people who not only are the ones they are supposed to help, but pay the doctors' salaries as well? According to section 12181 of the ADA, paragraph 7, such an office is considered "a professional health office of a health care provider" and therefore must be accessible. Why is he allowed to get away with this? One final question. Why on tax forms do the blind receive tax breaks while other disabled persons do not. Who decided that the blind are always the worst off? I believe that the tax break should be based on the severity of the disease, and not a simple "he deserves it for being blind" decision. People often wonder why disabled-rights groups such as the aforementioned RCAL become militant and stage boycotts of local businesses. Unfortunately, these people don't understand what it's like to not be able to enter a building because a physical malady prevents one from entering the front door. These people will never understand until it happens to them or someone they care about. It's like the person who always parks in a disabled parking spot because they'll "only be a minute." As soon as they are injured and need this spot, they suddenly understand the frustration of not being as free as other members of society because of careless citizens and a disability. I always thought that America was a better country than that. I hope that I won't be proven wrong, and I hope something can he done to remedy this situation. Hopefully, some money can be appropriated to increase enforcement of the laws already on the books if new laws can't he passed or new committees created to prevent these problems before they occur. I don't think it much matters how the problem is solved as long as we can be assured that someone is at least making an attempt at trying to solve it. Sincerely, XX XX (b)(6) 01-02884