Government Code §11546.7 – The requirement that state agency heads certify, every two years, that their agency’s website meets the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, Version 2.0 or a subsequent version, at Level AA or higher, and the requirements of Sections 11135 and 7405 of the Government Code. Created by AB 434 (Baker, Chapter 780, Statutes of 2017), and sometimes referred to as AB 434.
Title III also has applications to existing facilities. One of the definitions of "discrimination" under Title III of the ADA is a "failure to remove" architectural barriers in existing facilities. See 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iv). This means that even facilities that have not been modified or altered in any way after the ADA was passed still have obligations. The standard is whether "removing barriers" (typically defined as bringing a condition into compliance with the ADAAG) is "readily achievable", defined as "...easily accomplished without much difficulty or expense".
I have lived at my current residence for 1 year now. Last month I was prescribed by my Dr an Emotional Support Pet. This week I received an eviction notice stating that the dog I have was not prior approved and outweighed the current apartment pet policy. Do I have a right to request reasonable accommodations for my Support animal and if my Landlord refuses, what can I do?
In October 2004, the Division of the State Architect received from the United States Department of Justice, an initial response to the request for certification that the California Building Code meets or exceeds the new construction and alterations requirements of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the United States Department of Justice's regulation implementing Title III, including the ADA Standards for Accessible Design.
Accessibility to buildings or portions of buildings shall be provided for all occupancy classifications except as specifically modified by the building code. Individual occupancy requirements in the code may modify the general requirements for accessibility, but never to the exclusion of them entirely — unless the requirements for an individual occupancy specifically overrides a general requirement. Multistory buildings must provide access by ramp or elevator, with elevator exceptions available for some buildings. Generally, two story office buildings are not required to have elevators, although all other accessible features are still required on upper floors.
If your website is not already ADA compliant, you are automatically missing out on millions of potential customers who cannot access your site due to their disabilities. In fact, there are nearly 50 million people with disabilities in the U.S., which means about 19 percent of this country has a disability. Many of them might be interested in your products or services, but once they arrive at your website, they won't be able to navigate easily enough to buy anything or even contact you, all because your website is only accessible to people without disabilities. Thus, they may move on to your competitors.
The CBC definition for Electric Vehicle Charging Station (EVCS) describes “One or more electric vehicle charging spaces served by an electric vehicle charger or other charging equipment.” Where a vehicle space is not provided with a charger it is not, by definition, an EVCS. CBC Chapter 11B accessibility provisions only apply to vehicle spaces with a charger.
Hello, we are thinking of leasing the second floor of a renovated Victorian home for our business. The business is an office where we service insurance claims but the nature of the business is such that we would not have business invitees (such as insureds and claimants). The building has an exterior stairway to access the level we are going to lease. There is no elevator and one is not contemplated. For our use, it is fine but does it have to have an elevator just for the sake of use as a business, despite the lack of being for actual “public” use? Thank you!
Now that we have established the risks, where do we go from here? First, companies should run an accessibility scan of their webpages. There are numerous free online tools that can be used, including: http://www.wave.webaim.org and https://achecker.ca/checker/index.php. This will provide an overview of potential issues that need to be resolved. If you have in-house developers or IT, this is best handled by them. Second, look into getting ADA compliant before you receive a demand letter. Be aware however, that compliance is not cheap. Depending on your website, how much hand holding your company needs, and a few other variables, you could be looking at spending $25,000 – $50,000, on average. Third, if you receive a demand letter, make sure you hire counsel that has experience with these cases. Various legal arguments have been raised to dismiss these cases at the outset – some have been successful, but many have not. You have to consider all available options. And finally, since this will not be addressed by the DOJ anytime soon, ask your Congressperson to make sure guidelines are enacted as soon as possible. Those guidelines should take into account a business’ operations and size.
When a building, or portion of a building, is required to be accessible or adaptable, an accessible route of travel shall be provided to all portions of the building, to accessible building entrances and between the building and the public way. Except within an individual dwelling unit, an accessible route of travel shall not pass though kitchens, storage rooms, restrooms, closets or other spaces used for similar purposes.
The fact that the California federal courts only had ten website accessibility lawsuits filings in 2018 may be a surprise to some since California continues to lead the pack in the number of all ADA Title III lawsuit filings in federal court. However, it appears that plaintiffs filed their new cases in state court after a federal judge in the Central District of California dismissed a website accessibility lawsuit against Dominos’ in 2017. The Ninth Circuit reversed that dismissal last month, making California federal court an attractive venue for plaintiffs once again. We predict that the Ninth Circuit’s ruling will cause the number of website accessibility lawsuits in California federal courts to increase dramatically in 2019.
EVCS installed at public buildings, public accommodations, commercial facilities and public housing are required to comply with the accessibility requirements in CBC Chapter 11B. Compliance with these provisions is not required where EVCS are not available to the general public and intended for use by a designated vehicle or driver (see CBC Section 11B-228.3.2 Exception 1).
I fully support ADA requirements and the DGS' efforts. We are reconstructing a 325 space parking lot. 8% will be EVSE ready. 32 EVSE will be installed initially. Including EVSE required ADA spaces, new plan results in 322 spaces. Parking facility no longer complies with minimum parking requirements for facilities. Any suggestions for resolving this conflict for reworking of existing sites subject to CALGreen?
I am a truck driver with for a local county in northern Ca. I have been on disability for almost 9 months due to a battle with cancer and a recent surgery to remove it. My surgeon is releasing me to go back to work with some heavy restrictions to my duties, and the county says they may not be able to accommodate me. Is this legal? Don’t they have to accommodate me?
In general, when alterations are made to existing buildings or facilities, an accessible path of travel to the specific area of alteration shall be provided; this path of travel includes a primary entrance to the building or facility, toilet and bathing facilities serving the area of alteration, drinking fountains serving the area of alteration, public telephones serving the area of alteration, and signs as well as accessible routes which connect the area of alteration with site arrival points such as sidewalks, streets, and accessible parking (see CBC Section 11B-202.4). In general, these listed elements, if provided on the site, are required to comply with the current code requirements or be brought into compliance when an alteration occurs. In the context of EVCS, this scheme will apply when EVCS are installed at existing facilities where vehicle fueling, recharging, parking or storage is a primary function. These types of facilities include gas stations, stand-alone parking lots and stand-alone parking structures. Compliance is required to the maximum extent feasible without exceeding 20 percent of the cost of the work directly associated with the installation of EVCS (see Section 11B-202.4 Exception 10).
When a property owner hits the 20% cost limitation on path of travel improvements, the jurisdictional entity cannot require further improvements to the path of travel to occur. The property owner should be advised, however, that for older facilities that pre-date the ADA, barrier removal is required by the ADA. Barrier removal, however, will not be enforced by the local jurisdictional entity.
The new CBC accessibility requirements for EVCS specifically identify that each EVCS, whether or not accessible, provided with a point-of-sale device must provide a tactilely discernable numerical keypad, like a push-button telephone keypad or some other technology such as RFID, biometric fingerprint or other mechanism that allows access and privacy (see CBC Section 11B-707.9.1).
Staples were to use good faith efforts to ensure that all pages of www.Staples.com would substantially comply with the priority one and two checkpoints of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 1.0) by no later than June 30, 2009. This was before the introduction of WCAG 2.0, therefore Staples had the opportunity to choose either version 1.0 or 2.0 of WCAG after supersession. If WCAG 2.0 would be selected, according to the agreement, Staples would have to meet conformance level AA.
Good afternoon. My son with disabilities attends an elementary school. Most children in his class have ambulatory issues. All have mental development issues. There is not one entrance to the school, school buildings, or classroom that has an automatic door opener. When questioned about this I was told because there is always some one there to help get thought the doors it’s okay. This isn’t true. But even if someone were is that answer/situation acceptable? Is a public school allowed to not be in ADA compliance? Thank you for your response.
The exact terms are undisclosed, however, ADA website accessibility settlements required companies to update their online and mobile presence to better accommodate the visually impaired. This includes code fixes and other changes that make websites and apps more compatible with screen reader technology. The cases were filed early 2017 and settled within weeks.
Does Ca law trump Federal or vice versa? We have a private community pool with 220 members. We have a swim team, which makes us a public entity (they allow nonmembers to join). We have been told to get 2 modes of entry into the pool. I would like swim team to pay for 2 chair lifts since we would be private and therefore not legally have to put in chair lifts without the team being there. Please advise.
In this case, Barnett was a US Airways employee who injured his back, rendering him physically unable to perform his cargo-handling job. Invoking seniority, he transferred to a less-demanding mailroom job, but this position later became open to seniority-based bidding and was bid on by more senior employees. Barnett requested the accommodation of being allowed to stay on in the less-demanding mailroom job. US Airways denied his request, and he lost his job.
The fact sheet linked below provides a brief overview of the requirements. For full scoping and technical requirements of the building standards for electric vehicle charging stations, please refer to the full text of the California Building Code regulations at Building Standards Commission (Part 2, Volume 1). The building code amendments include provisions in Chapter 2 (Definitions) and Chapter 11B (Accessibility to Public Buildings, Public Accommodations, Commercial Buildings and Public Housing).
I am hearing impaired with one hearing aide and a cochlear implant in the other ear. It is becoming increasing harder for me to hear on the phone, in fact I have been texting as my first method of communication. On Tues I had a hearing test done, my hearing loss is progressively getting worse. Must cellular companies offer visual texting FREE to people under ADA? I live in CA. I am certified by the State of CA to be legally deaf.
There are thousands of code jurisdictions in the United States that enforce some combination of state building codes. Some, but not all of these include accessibility requirements. Although many are based on a model code, there are major variations among the state codes. Design and construction in accordance with these codes will not constitute compliance with the ADA, unless the codes impose requirements equal to or greater than those of the ADA.
Under 2010 revisions of Department of Justice regulations, newly constructed or altered swimming pools, wading pools, and spas must have an accessible means of entrance and exit to pools for disabled people. However, the requirement is conditioned on whether providing access through a fixed lift is "readily achievable". Other requirements exist, based on pool size, include providing a certain number of accessible means of entry and exit, which are outlined in Section 242 of the standards. However, businesses are free to consider the differences in the application of the rules depending on whether the pool is new or altered, or whether the swimming pool was in existence before the effective date of the new rule. Full compliance may not be required for existing facilities; Section 242 and 1009 of the 2010 Standards outline such exceptions.
In 2014, the DOJ filed a Complaint in Intervention on a pending case between the National Federation of the Blind and H & R Block. According to that Complaint, “the inaccessibility of H&R Block’s website prevents people with disabilities from independently preparing and filing taxes online, downloading tax preparation software, etc.” The settlement was broken down into two phases: Phase I- (to be completed by 01/2015) H&R Block shall ensure that www.hrblock.com and the Online Tax Preparation Product conform to, at minimum, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 Level A and AA Success Criteria (“WCAG 2.0 AA”). And Phase II- (to be completed by 01/2016) H&R Block shall ensure that its mobile applications conform to, at minimum, the WCAG 2.0 AA.
The California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) prohibits employment practices that discriminate against an applicant or employee on the basis of an actual or perceived physical or mental disability or medical condition, unless the condition prevents the employee from performing the essential functions of the job or affects the health and safety of the individual or fellow employees. FEHA also prohibits discrimination based on an individual's genetic information and harassment based on an actual or perceived protected characteristic. FEHA covers private employers with five or more employees and all public employers, except for the harassment provision that applies to all public and private employers, regardless of size (CA Gov. Code Sec. 12926).
Legal precedent is changing, and ADA compliance related lawsuits are becoming more successful, and the courts are seeing more of them as a result. Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act pertains to private sector businesses. Lately, those protections are more frequently expanding into digital territory as web and mobile applications become more necessary in our day-to-day lives.
The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) rulemaking to create new website accessibility regulations is now officially dead, as we recently blogged. The lack of clear rules will lead to more litigation and inconsistent judicially-made law. In fact, it appears that the DOJ will not be issuing any new regulations under Title III of the ADA about any subject, according to the agency’s December 26 announcement in the Federal Register repealing all pending ADA Title III rulemakings.
Title II prohibits disability discrimination by all public entities at the local level, e.g., school district, municipal, city, or county, and at state level. Public entities must comply with Title II regulations by the U.S. Department of Justice. These regulations cover access to all programs and services offered by the entity. Access includes physical access described in the ADA Standards for Accessible Design and programmatic access that might be obstructed by discriminatory policies or procedures of the entity.