Thursday, January 14, 2010
Common Problems
U.S. Department of JusticeCivil Rights DivisionDisability Rights Section
The ADA and City Governments: Common Problems
IntroductionAccess to civic life by people with disabilities is a fundamental goal of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). To ensure that this goal is met, Title II of the ADA requires State and local governments to make their programs and services accessible to persons with disabilities. This requirement extends not only to physical access at government facilities, programs, and events -- but also to policy changes that governmental entities must make to ensure that all people with disabilities can take part in, and benefit from, the programs and services of State and local governments. In addition, governmental entities must ensure effective communication -- including the provision of necessary auxiliary aids and services -- so that individuals with disabilities can participate in civic life.
D
One important way to ensure that Title II's requirements are being met in cities of all sizes is through self-evaluation, which is required by the ADA regulations. Self-evaluation enables local governments to pinpoint the facilities, programs and services that must be modified or relocated to ensure that local governments are complying with the ADA.
This document contains a sampling of common problems shared by city governments of all sizes that have been identified through the Department of Justice's ongoing enforcement efforts. The document provides examples of common deficiencies and explains how these problems affect persons with disabilities. The document is not intended to be comprehensive or exhaustive.
D
For additional information about the Americans with Disabilities Act's Title II requirements, please contact the Department of Justice ADA Information Line. This free service provides answers to general and technical questions about ADA requirements and free ADA documents, such as Commonly Asked Questions about Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Commonly Asked Questions about the Americans with Disabilities Act and Law Enforcement, Title II Highlights, Access for 9-1-1 and Telephone Emergency Services, the ADA Guide for Small Towns, and the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. You may reach the ADA Information Line at:
800-514-0301 (voice) or 800-514-0383 (TTY)
ADA information is also available on the Department's ADA Home Page on the World Wide Web at:
http://www.ada.gov/adahom1.htm.
Issue: "Grandfather" Clause or Small Entity Exemption
Common Problem:
City governments may believe that their existing programs and facilities are protected by a "grandfather" clause from having to comply with the requirements of Title II of the ADA. Small municipalities may also believe that are exempt from complying with Title II because of their size.
Result:
Because city governments wrongly believe that a "grandfather" clause or a small entity exemption shields them from complying with Title II of the ADA, they fail to take steps to provide program access or to make modifications to policies, practices, and procedures that are required by law. People with disabilities are unable to gain access to city facilities, programs, services, or activities because of a public entity's reliance on these common misconceptions.
Requirement:
There is no "grandfather" clause in the ADA. However, the law is flexible. City governments must comply with Title II of the ADA, and must provide program access for people with disabilities to the whole range of city services and programs. In providing program access city governments are not required to take any action that would result in a fundamental alteration to the nature of the service, program, or activity in question or that would result in undue financial and administrative burdens. This determination can only be made by the head of the public entity or a designee and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. The determination that undue burden would result must be based on all resources available for use in a program. If an action would result in such an alteration or such burdens, a city government must take any other action that it can to ensure that people with disabilities receive the benefits and services of the program or activity. 28 C.F.R. § 35.150(a)(3).
D
Similarly, there is no exemption from Title II requirements for small municipalities. While public entities that have less than 50 employees are not required to comply with limited sections of the Department of Justice's regulations, such as maintaining self- evaluations on file for three years and designating a grievance procedure for ADA complaints, no general exemption applies. All public entities, regardless of size, must comply with Title II's requirements. 28 C.F.R. § 35.104.
Issue: Program Accessibility
Common Problem:
City governments often have failed to ensure that the whole range of the city's services, municipal buildings, and programs meet Title II's program access requirements.
Result:
People with disabilities are unable to participate in the activities of city government, such as public meetings, unable to attend city functions, and unable to gain access to the city's various programs and services. If a municipal building such as a courthouse is inaccessible, people with disabilities who use wheelchairs are unable to participate in jury duty, attend hearings, and gain access to other services, because doorways are too narrow, restroom facilities are inaccessible, and steps are the only way to get to all or portions of a facility.
D
Requirement:
Title II requires city governments to ensure that all of their programs, services, and activities, when viewed in their entirety, are accessible to people with disabilities. Program access is intended to remove physical barriers to city services, programs, and activities, but it generally does not require that a city government make each facility, or each part of a facility, accessible. For example, each restroom in a facility need not be made accessible. However, signage directing people with disabilities to the accessible features and spaces in a facility should be provided. Program accessibility may be achieved in a variety of ways. City governments may choose to make structural changes to existing facilities to achieve access. But city governments can also pursue alternatives to structural changes to achieve program accessibility. For example, city governments can move public meetings to accessible buildings and can relocate services for individuals with disabilities to accessible levels or parts of buildings. When choosing between possible methods of program accessibility, however, city governments must give priority to the choices that offer services, programs, and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate. In addition, all newly constructed city facilities must be fully accessible to people with disabilities. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.149, 35.150, 35.151, 35.163.
Issue: Historically Significant Facilities
Common Problem:
City governments may believe that they have no duty to make changes to historically significant buildings and facilities to improve accessibility for people with disabilities.
Result:
Many city programs, services, and activities are conducted in buildings that are historically significant. In addition, many cities operate historic preservation programs at historic sites for educational and cultural purposes. If no accessibility changes are made at these facilities and locations, individuals with disabilities are unable to visit and participate in the programs offered. For example, people who use wheelchairs would not be able to reach the courtroom or clerk's office located in a historic nineteenth century courthouse if no physical changes are made to achieve access.
Requirement:
Historically significant facilities are those facilities or properties that are listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or properties designated as historic under State or local law. Structural changes to these facilities that would threaten or destroy the historical significance of the property or would fundamentally change the program being offered at the historic facility need not be undertaken. Nevertheless, a city must consider alternatives to structural changes in these instances -- including using audio-visual materials to depict the inaccessible portions of the facility and other innovative solutions.
D
If alterations are being made to a historically significant property, however, these changes must be made in conformance with the ADA Standards for Accessible Design, ("the Standards"), 28 C.F.R. Part 36, § 4.1.7, or the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards, ("UFAS") § 4.1.7, to the maximum extent feasible. If following either set of standards would threaten or destroy the historical significance of the property, alternative standards, which provide a minimal level of access, may be used. This decision must be made in consultation with the appropriate historic advisory board designated in the Standards or UFAS, and interested persons should be invited to participate in the decision-making process. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.150(b)(2); 35.151(d); Standards § 4.1.7; UFAS § 4.1.7. If these lesser standards would threaten or destroy historically significant features, then the programs or services conducted in the facility must be offered in an alternative accessible manner or location.
Issue: Curb Ramps
Common Problem:
City governments often do not provide necessary curb ramps to ensure that people with disabilities can travel throughout the city in a safe and convenient manner.
Result:
Without the required curb ramps, sidewalk travel in urban areas is dangerous, difficult, and in some cases impossible for people who use wheelchairs, scooters, and other mobility aids. Curb ramps allow people with mobility impairments to gain access to the sidewalks and to pass through center islands in streets. Otherwise, these individuals are forced to travel in streets and roadways and are put in danger or are prevented from reaching their destination.
Requirement:
When streets and roads are newly built or altered, they must have ramps wherever there are curbs or other barriers to entry from a pedestrian walkway. Likewise, when new sidewalks or walkways are built or altered, they must contain curb ramps or sloped areas wherever they intersect with streets or roads. While resurfacing a street or sidewalk is considered an alteration for these purposes, filling in potholes alone will not trigger the alterations requirements. At existing roads and sidewalks that have not been altered, however, city governments may choose to construct curb ramps at every point where a pedestrian walkway intersects a curb, but they are not necessarily required to do so. Under program access, alternative routes to buildings that make use of existing curb ramps may be acceptable where people with disabilities must only travel a marginally longer route.
D
One way to ensure the proper integration of curb ramps throughout a city is to set a series of milestones for curb ramp compliance in the city's transition plan. Milestones are progress dates for meeting curb ramp compliance throughout the municipality. Milestones should occur on a regular basis throughout the course of the transition plan and must reflect a priority to walkways serving government buildings and facilities, bus stops and other transportation services, places of public accommodation, and business districts, followed by walkways serving residential areas. It also may be appropriate for a city government to establish an ongoing procedure for installing curb ramps upon request in both residential and nonresidential areas frequented by individuals with disabilities. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.150(d)(2); 35.151(e). In setting milestones and in implementing a curb cut transition plan for existing sidewalks, the actual number of curb cuts installed in any given year may be limited by the fundamental alteration and undue burden limitations.
Issue: Effective Communication
Common Problem:
City governments often fail to provide qualified interpreters or assistive listening devices for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing at public events or meetings. In addition, city governments often fail to provide materials in alternate formats (Braille, large print, or audio cassettes) to individuals who are blind or have low vision.
Result:
Individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing are unable to participate in government- sponsored events or public meetings and unable to benefit from city programs and services when they are not provided with appropriate auxiliary aids and services. Likewise, people who are blind or have low vision are unable to benefit from city government services when printed materials are the only means of communication available.
Requirement:
Title II requires that city governments ensure that communications with individuals with disabilities are as effective as communications with others. Thus, city governments must provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services for people with disabilities (e.g., qualified interpreters, notetakers, computer-aided transcription services, assistive listening systems, written materials, audio recordings, computer disks, large print, and Brailled materials) to ensure that individuals with disabilities will be able to participate in the range of city services and programs. City governments must give primary consideration to the type of auxiliary aid or service that an individual with a disability requests. The final decision is the government's.
D
The type of auxiliary aid or service necessary to ensure effective communication will vary in accordance with the length and complexity of the communication involved and the needs of the individual. For example, sign language interpreters are not required for all interactions with people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Employees can often communicate effectively with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing through standard written materials and exchange of written notes. For simple transactions like paying bills or filing applications, these methods may be sufficient. For more complex or extensive communications, however, such as court hearings, public meetings, and interrogation by police officers, interpreters or assistive listening systems are likely to be necessary.
City governments should ensure that auxiliary aids and services are also provided for individuals who are blind or have low vision. Alternate formats, such as Brailled or large print materials, qualified readers, computer disks, or audio recordings are examples of appropriate auxiliary aids.
City governments are not required to take any actions that will result in a fundamental alteration or in undue financial and administrative burdens. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.160-35.164.
Issue: Local Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations
Common Problem:
City governments may fail to consider reasonable modifications in local laws, ordinances, and regulations that would avoid discrimination against individuals with disabilities.
Result:
Laws, ordinances, and regulations that appear to be neutral often adversely impact individuals with disabilities. For example, where a municipal zoning ordinance requires a set-back of 12 feet from the curb in the central business district, installing a ramp to ensure access for people who use wheelchairs may be impermissible without a variance from the city. People with disabilities are therefore unable to gain access to businesses in the city.
D
Requirement:
City governments are required to make reasonable modifications to policies, practices, or procedures to prevent discrimination on the basis of disability. Reasonable modifications can include modifications to local laws, ordinances, and regulations that adversely impact people with disabilities. For example, it may be a reasonable modification to grant a variance for zoning requirements and setbacks. In addition, city governments may consider granting exceptions to the enforcement of certain laws as a form of reasonable modification. For example, a municipal ordinance banning animals from city health clinics may need to be modified to allow a blind individual who uses a service animal to bring the animal to a mental health counseling session. 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(7).
Issue: 9-1-1 Systems
Common Problem:
City governments do not provide direct and equal access to 9-1-1 systems, or similar emergency response systems, for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing and use TTY's (TDD's or text telephones ) or computer modems.
Result:
People who are deaf or hard of hearing, or those who have speech impairments, and use TTY's or computer modems for telephone communication are unable to access emergency services (police, fire and ambulance) that are necessary for health and safety. When direct emergency services are not available, emergency calls for individuals with disabilities are not responded to appropriately, or in a timely manner, and in some instances, not at all.
Requirement:
City governments that provide emergency telephone services must provide direct access to TTY calls. This means that emergency telephone services can directly receive calls from TTY's and computer modem users without relying on state relay services or third parties. A TTY must be located at each individual operator station. City governments must ensure that emergency operators are trained to use the TTY not only when they recognize the tones of a TTY at the other end of the line, but also when they receive a "silent call." 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.161, 35.162. (See Access for 9-1-1 and Telephone Emergency Services)
Issue: Law Enforcement Policies, Practices, and Procedures
Common Problem:
When dealing with persons with disabilities, law enforcement agencies often fail to modify policies, practices, or procedures in a variety of law enforcement settings -- including citizen interaction, detention, and arrest procedures.
Result:
When interacting with police and other law enforcement officers, people with disabilities are often placed in unsafe situations or are unable to communicate with officers because standard police practices and policies are not appropriately modified. For example, individuals who are deaf or have hearing impairments and use sign language may be unable to communicate with law enforcement officers if they are taken into custody and handcuffed behind their backs. Similarly, individuals with epilepsy or diabetes may be placed at great risk if they are not permitted access to their medications.
Requirement:
Title II of the ADA requires law enforcement agencies to make reasonable modifications in their policies, practices, or procedures that are necessary to ensure accessibility for individuals with disabilities, unless making such modifications would fundamentally alter the program or service involved. Law enforcement officers should be prepared to make reasonable modifications, for example, by allowing, in appropriate circumstances, arrestees who are deaf to be handcuffed in front of their bodies so that they can communicate with others and by allowing detainees access to their medication. 28 C.F.R. § 35.150(b)(7). (See Commonly Asked Questions about the Americans with Disabilities Act and Law Enforcement)
Issue: Self-Evaluation and Transition Plans
Common Problem:
City governments often have not conducted thorough self-evaluations of their current facilities, programs, policies, and practices to determine what changes are necessary to meet the ADA's requirements, and have not developed transition plans to implement these changes.
Result:
When self-evaluations are not conducted and transition plans not developed, city governments are ill-equipped to implement accessibility changes required by the ADA. Without a complete assessment of a city's various facilities, services, and programs, it is difficult to plan or budget for necessary changes, and the city can only react to problems rather than anticipate and correct them in advance. As a result, people with disabilities cannot participate in or benefit from the city's services, programs, and activities.
Requirement:
All city governments were required to complete a self-evaluation of their facilities, programs, policies, and practices by January 26, 1993. The self-evaluation identifies and corrects those policies and practices that are inconsistent with Title II's requirements. Self-evaluations should consider all of a city's programs, activities, and services, as well as the policies and practices that a city has put in place to implement its various programs and services. Remedial measures necessary to bring the programs, policies, and services into compliance with Title II should be specified -- including, but not limited to: (1) relocation of programs to accessible facilities; (2) offering programs in an alternative accessible manner; (3) structural changes to provide program access; (4) policy modifications to ensure nondiscrimination; and (5) auxiliary aids needed to provide effective communication.
D
If a city that employs 50 or more persons decides to make structural changes to achieve program access, it must develop a transition plan that identifies those changes and sets a schedule for implementing them. Both the self-evaluation and transition plans must be available to the public. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.105, 35.150(d).
The ADA and City Governments: Common Problems
IntroductionAccess to civic life by people with disabilities is a fundamental goal of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). To ensure that this goal is met, Title II of the ADA requires State and local governments to make their programs and services accessible to persons with disabilities. This requirement extends not only to physical access at government facilities, programs, and events -- but also to policy changes that governmental entities must make to ensure that all people with disabilities can take part in, and benefit from, the programs and services of State and local governments. In addition, governmental entities must ensure effective communication -- including the provision of necessary auxiliary aids and services -- so that individuals with disabilities can participate in civic life.
D
One important way to ensure that Title II's requirements are being met in cities of all sizes is through self-evaluation, which is required by the ADA regulations. Self-evaluation enables local governments to pinpoint the facilities, programs and services that must be modified or relocated to ensure that local governments are complying with the ADA.
This document contains a sampling of common problems shared by city governments of all sizes that have been identified through the Department of Justice's ongoing enforcement efforts. The document provides examples of common deficiencies and explains how these problems affect persons with disabilities. The document is not intended to be comprehensive or exhaustive.
D
For additional information about the Americans with Disabilities Act's Title II requirements, please contact the Department of Justice ADA Information Line. This free service provides answers to general and technical questions about ADA requirements and free ADA documents, such as Commonly Asked Questions about Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Commonly Asked Questions about the Americans with Disabilities Act and Law Enforcement, Title II Highlights, Access for 9-1-1 and Telephone Emergency Services, the ADA Guide for Small Towns, and the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. You may reach the ADA Information Line at:
800-514-0301 (voice) or 800-514-0383 (TTY)
ADA information is also available on the Department's ADA Home Page on the World Wide Web at:
http://www.ada.gov/adahom1.htm.
Issue: "Grandfather" Clause or Small Entity Exemption
Common Problem:
City governments may believe that their existing programs and facilities are protected by a "grandfather" clause from having to comply with the requirements of Title II of the ADA. Small municipalities may also believe that are exempt from complying with Title II because of their size.
Result:
Because city governments wrongly believe that a "grandfather" clause or a small entity exemption shields them from complying with Title II of the ADA, they fail to take steps to provide program access or to make modifications to policies, practices, and procedures that are required by law. People with disabilities are unable to gain access to city facilities, programs, services, or activities because of a public entity's reliance on these common misconceptions.
Requirement:
There is no "grandfather" clause in the ADA. However, the law is flexible. City governments must comply with Title II of the ADA, and must provide program access for people with disabilities to the whole range of city services and programs. In providing program access city governments are not required to take any action that would result in a fundamental alteration to the nature of the service, program, or activity in question or that would result in undue financial and administrative burdens. This determination can only be made by the head of the public entity or a designee and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. The determination that undue burden would result must be based on all resources available for use in a program. If an action would result in such an alteration or such burdens, a city government must take any other action that it can to ensure that people with disabilities receive the benefits and services of the program or activity. 28 C.F.R. § 35.150(a)(3).
D
Similarly, there is no exemption from Title II requirements for small municipalities. While public entities that have less than 50 employees are not required to comply with limited sections of the Department of Justice's regulations, such as maintaining self- evaluations on file for three years and designating a grievance procedure for ADA complaints, no general exemption applies. All public entities, regardless of size, must comply with Title II's requirements. 28 C.F.R. § 35.104.
Issue: Program Accessibility
Common Problem:
City governments often have failed to ensure that the whole range of the city's services, municipal buildings, and programs meet Title II's program access requirements.
Result:
People with disabilities are unable to participate in the activities of city government, such as public meetings, unable to attend city functions, and unable to gain access to the city's various programs and services. If a municipal building such as a courthouse is inaccessible, people with disabilities who use wheelchairs are unable to participate in jury duty, attend hearings, and gain access to other services, because doorways are too narrow, restroom facilities are inaccessible, and steps are the only way to get to all or portions of a facility.
D
Requirement:
Title II requires city governments to ensure that all of their programs, services, and activities, when viewed in their entirety, are accessible to people with disabilities. Program access is intended to remove physical barriers to city services, programs, and activities, but it generally does not require that a city government make each facility, or each part of a facility, accessible. For example, each restroom in a facility need not be made accessible. However, signage directing people with disabilities to the accessible features and spaces in a facility should be provided. Program accessibility may be achieved in a variety of ways. City governments may choose to make structural changes to existing facilities to achieve access. But city governments can also pursue alternatives to structural changes to achieve program accessibility. For example, city governments can move public meetings to accessible buildings and can relocate services for individuals with disabilities to accessible levels or parts of buildings. When choosing between possible methods of program accessibility, however, city governments must give priority to the choices that offer services, programs, and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate. In addition, all newly constructed city facilities must be fully accessible to people with disabilities. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.149, 35.150, 35.151, 35.163.
Issue: Historically Significant Facilities
Common Problem:
City governments may believe that they have no duty to make changes to historically significant buildings and facilities to improve accessibility for people with disabilities.
Result:
Many city programs, services, and activities are conducted in buildings that are historically significant. In addition, many cities operate historic preservation programs at historic sites for educational and cultural purposes. If no accessibility changes are made at these facilities and locations, individuals with disabilities are unable to visit and participate in the programs offered. For example, people who use wheelchairs would not be able to reach the courtroom or clerk's office located in a historic nineteenth century courthouse if no physical changes are made to achieve access.
Requirement:
Historically significant facilities are those facilities or properties that are listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or properties designated as historic under State or local law. Structural changes to these facilities that would threaten or destroy the historical significance of the property or would fundamentally change the program being offered at the historic facility need not be undertaken. Nevertheless, a city must consider alternatives to structural changes in these instances -- including using audio-visual materials to depict the inaccessible portions of the facility and other innovative solutions.
D
If alterations are being made to a historically significant property, however, these changes must be made in conformance with the ADA Standards for Accessible Design, ("the Standards"), 28 C.F.R. Part 36, § 4.1.7, or the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards, ("UFAS") § 4.1.7, to the maximum extent feasible. If following either set of standards would threaten or destroy the historical significance of the property, alternative standards, which provide a minimal level of access, may be used. This decision must be made in consultation with the appropriate historic advisory board designated in the Standards or UFAS, and interested persons should be invited to participate in the decision-making process. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.150(b)(2); 35.151(d); Standards § 4.1.7; UFAS § 4.1.7. If these lesser standards would threaten or destroy historically significant features, then the programs or services conducted in the facility must be offered in an alternative accessible manner or location.
Issue: Curb Ramps
Common Problem:
City governments often do not provide necessary curb ramps to ensure that people with disabilities can travel throughout the city in a safe and convenient manner.
Result:
Without the required curb ramps, sidewalk travel in urban areas is dangerous, difficult, and in some cases impossible for people who use wheelchairs, scooters, and other mobility aids. Curb ramps allow people with mobility impairments to gain access to the sidewalks and to pass through center islands in streets. Otherwise, these individuals are forced to travel in streets and roadways and are put in danger or are prevented from reaching their destination.
Requirement:
When streets and roads are newly built or altered, they must have ramps wherever there are curbs or other barriers to entry from a pedestrian walkway. Likewise, when new sidewalks or walkways are built or altered, they must contain curb ramps or sloped areas wherever they intersect with streets or roads. While resurfacing a street or sidewalk is considered an alteration for these purposes, filling in potholes alone will not trigger the alterations requirements. At existing roads and sidewalks that have not been altered, however, city governments may choose to construct curb ramps at every point where a pedestrian walkway intersects a curb, but they are not necessarily required to do so. Under program access, alternative routes to buildings that make use of existing curb ramps may be acceptable where people with disabilities must only travel a marginally longer route.
D
One way to ensure the proper integration of curb ramps throughout a city is to set a series of milestones for curb ramp compliance in the city's transition plan. Milestones are progress dates for meeting curb ramp compliance throughout the municipality. Milestones should occur on a regular basis throughout the course of the transition plan and must reflect a priority to walkways serving government buildings and facilities, bus stops and other transportation services, places of public accommodation, and business districts, followed by walkways serving residential areas. It also may be appropriate for a city government to establish an ongoing procedure for installing curb ramps upon request in both residential and nonresidential areas frequented by individuals with disabilities. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.150(d)(2); 35.151(e). In setting milestones and in implementing a curb cut transition plan for existing sidewalks, the actual number of curb cuts installed in any given year may be limited by the fundamental alteration and undue burden limitations.
Issue: Effective Communication
Common Problem:
City governments often fail to provide qualified interpreters or assistive listening devices for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing at public events or meetings. In addition, city governments often fail to provide materials in alternate formats (Braille, large print, or audio cassettes) to individuals who are blind or have low vision.
Result:
Individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing are unable to participate in government- sponsored events or public meetings and unable to benefit from city programs and services when they are not provided with appropriate auxiliary aids and services. Likewise, people who are blind or have low vision are unable to benefit from city government services when printed materials are the only means of communication available.
Requirement:
Title II requires that city governments ensure that communications with individuals with disabilities are as effective as communications with others. Thus, city governments must provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services for people with disabilities (e.g., qualified interpreters, notetakers, computer-aided transcription services, assistive listening systems, written materials, audio recordings, computer disks, large print, and Brailled materials) to ensure that individuals with disabilities will be able to participate in the range of city services and programs. City governments must give primary consideration to the type of auxiliary aid or service that an individual with a disability requests. The final decision is the government's.
D
The type of auxiliary aid or service necessary to ensure effective communication will vary in accordance with the length and complexity of the communication involved and the needs of the individual. For example, sign language interpreters are not required for all interactions with people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Employees can often communicate effectively with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing through standard written materials and exchange of written notes. For simple transactions like paying bills or filing applications, these methods may be sufficient. For more complex or extensive communications, however, such as court hearings, public meetings, and interrogation by police officers, interpreters or assistive listening systems are likely to be necessary.
City governments should ensure that auxiliary aids and services are also provided for individuals who are blind or have low vision. Alternate formats, such as Brailled or large print materials, qualified readers, computer disks, or audio recordings are examples of appropriate auxiliary aids.
City governments are not required to take any actions that will result in a fundamental alteration or in undue financial and administrative burdens. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.160-35.164.
Issue: Local Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations
Common Problem:
City governments may fail to consider reasonable modifications in local laws, ordinances, and regulations that would avoid discrimination against individuals with disabilities.
Result:
Laws, ordinances, and regulations that appear to be neutral often adversely impact individuals with disabilities. For example, where a municipal zoning ordinance requires a set-back of 12 feet from the curb in the central business district, installing a ramp to ensure access for people who use wheelchairs may be impermissible without a variance from the city. People with disabilities are therefore unable to gain access to businesses in the city.
D
Requirement:
City governments are required to make reasonable modifications to policies, practices, or procedures to prevent discrimination on the basis of disability. Reasonable modifications can include modifications to local laws, ordinances, and regulations that adversely impact people with disabilities. For example, it may be a reasonable modification to grant a variance for zoning requirements and setbacks. In addition, city governments may consider granting exceptions to the enforcement of certain laws as a form of reasonable modification. For example, a municipal ordinance banning animals from city health clinics may need to be modified to allow a blind individual who uses a service animal to bring the animal to a mental health counseling session. 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(7).
Issue: 9-1-1 Systems
Common Problem:
City governments do not provide direct and equal access to 9-1-1 systems, or similar emergency response systems, for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing and use TTY's (TDD's or text telephones ) or computer modems.
Result:
People who are deaf or hard of hearing, or those who have speech impairments, and use TTY's or computer modems for telephone communication are unable to access emergency services (police, fire and ambulance) that are necessary for health and safety. When direct emergency services are not available, emergency calls for individuals with disabilities are not responded to appropriately, or in a timely manner, and in some instances, not at all.
Requirement:
City governments that provide emergency telephone services must provide direct access to TTY calls. This means that emergency telephone services can directly receive calls from TTY's and computer modem users without relying on state relay services or third parties. A TTY must be located at each individual operator station. City governments must ensure that emergency operators are trained to use the TTY not only when they recognize the tones of a TTY at the other end of the line, but also when they receive a "silent call." 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.161, 35.162. (See Access for 9-1-1 and Telephone Emergency Services)
Issue: Law Enforcement Policies, Practices, and Procedures
Common Problem:
When dealing with persons with disabilities, law enforcement agencies often fail to modify policies, practices, or procedures in a variety of law enforcement settings -- including citizen interaction, detention, and arrest procedures.
Result:
When interacting with police and other law enforcement officers, people with disabilities are often placed in unsafe situations or are unable to communicate with officers because standard police practices and policies are not appropriately modified. For example, individuals who are deaf or have hearing impairments and use sign language may be unable to communicate with law enforcement officers if they are taken into custody and handcuffed behind their backs. Similarly, individuals with epilepsy or diabetes may be placed at great risk if they are not permitted access to their medications.
Requirement:
Title II of the ADA requires law enforcement agencies to make reasonable modifications in their policies, practices, or procedures that are necessary to ensure accessibility for individuals with disabilities, unless making such modifications would fundamentally alter the program or service involved. Law enforcement officers should be prepared to make reasonable modifications, for example, by allowing, in appropriate circumstances, arrestees who are deaf to be handcuffed in front of their bodies so that they can communicate with others and by allowing detainees access to their medication. 28 C.F.R. § 35.150(b)(7). (See Commonly Asked Questions about the Americans with Disabilities Act and Law Enforcement)
Issue: Self-Evaluation and Transition Plans
Common Problem:
City governments often have not conducted thorough self-evaluations of their current facilities, programs, policies, and practices to determine what changes are necessary to meet the ADA's requirements, and have not developed transition plans to implement these changes.
Result:
When self-evaluations are not conducted and transition plans not developed, city governments are ill-equipped to implement accessibility changes required by the ADA. Without a complete assessment of a city's various facilities, services, and programs, it is difficult to plan or budget for necessary changes, and the city can only react to problems rather than anticipate and correct them in advance. As a result, people with disabilities cannot participate in or benefit from the city's services, programs, and activities.
Requirement:
All city governments were required to complete a self-evaluation of their facilities, programs, policies, and practices by January 26, 1993. The self-evaluation identifies and corrects those policies and practices that are inconsistent with Title II's requirements. Self-evaluations should consider all of a city's programs, activities, and services, as well as the policies and practices that a city has put in place to implement its various programs and services. Remedial measures necessary to bring the programs, policies, and services into compliance with Title II should be specified -- including, but not limited to: (1) relocation of programs to accessible facilities; (2) offering programs in an alternative accessible manner; (3) structural changes to provide program access; (4) policy modifications to ensure nondiscrimination; and (5) auxiliary aids needed to provide effective communication.
D
If a city that employs 50 or more persons decides to make structural changes to achieve program access, it must develop a transition plan that identifies those changes and sets a schedule for implementing them. Both the self-evaluation and transition plans must be available to the public. 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.105, 35.150(d).
Government and Community
National Civic League
For communities to respond to their challenges, they must resolve, for themselves, that their capacity to solve problems requires revitalization. Outside consultants can make recommendations, but without local ownership of a strategy and implementation plan, it is not likely that the community will take action. The Civic Index, a twelve point community self-evaluation tool, helps communities develop their problem solving capacity by providing a method and a process for first identifying and recognizing their strengths and weaknesses, and then structuring collaborative approaches to solving shared problems. Today's column discusses the Civic Index component of Government Performance.
Local Government Can't Solve Problems Alone, But Must Do Its Part Efficiently and Effectively
As discussed in the previous column, the growing number and complexity of issues faced by localities demand that government, business, and the nonprofit sector work closely together in setting common goals and working together to achieve them.
As Drew O'Connor, assistant director of the National Civic League's Community Services reports from his work with communities throughout the country, "Communities that succeed today, recognize that power can't be concentrated in traditional government leadership positions such as mayors, city managers and board chairs. They have a place at the table for citizens and for neighborhood groups as well."
While government cannot solve all community problems by itself, it must be a positive force in addressing community needs. Government must perform well in regard to the functions over which it maintains responsibility.
The issue of government performance ultimately can be boiled down to the answer to two questions:
How responsive is a government to the needs and desires of the community it serves?
How valuable to the community are a government's services?
The first question encompasses government effectiveness and the second, government efficiency.
NCL's Measuring City Hall Performance: Finally a how-to guide defines efficiency as "[T]he relationship between inputs and outputs, that is, between the amount of resources used and the amount of service produced. An organization is said to be efficient if it minimizes the resources it uses to achieve that output."
Measuring City Hall Performance continues, "Effectiveness refers to the level of satisfaction with the services being delivered or the extent to which pre-determined goals and objectives have been reached. If a service or activity receives a high satisfaction rating from the public or achieves most of its goals, it is considered effective."
For a local government to be both effective and efficient, it needs to also be responsive, professional, accountable, equitable, entrepreneurial, and free of corruption. These characteristics can be evaluated by asking the following qualitative questions:
Is the government free of corruption?
Does government address qualitative concerns about services?
Is government professional and entrepreneurial?
Is government responsive and accountable?
Are services provided equitably?
Does government consider and utilize alternative methods of service delivery?
Is government a positive force in addressing community needs?
Yet, many communities today have found that these qualitative questions only provide the beginnings of a full evaluation of their local government's performance. They seek both a clear statement of governmental objectives and hard evidence upon which they can evaluate their government's success in attaining these objectives.
Certainly, when evaluating local government, subjective judgements are indispensable. But any decision or evaluation is stronger when supported by factual evidence. Performance measurement provides the means for improving local governmental actions and decisions by establishing a basis for a quantitative evaluation.
Measuring City Hall Performance provides this example: "[A] council may set as one of the municipality's goals, a 10 percent reduction in crimes committed. The police chief will develop an array of objectives designed to meet this goals. One of these objectives may be to clear 58 percent of reported crimes by means of arrest, on the theory that incarceration of criminals prevents them from committing more crimes, at least during their imprisonment. Thus, the police chief would deem his operation effective if the 58 percent clearance rate were achieved."
The full value of a performance measurement program could be realized if performance measurement were undertaken in all municipal departments. But performance measurement can also be applied to any individual service or on a service-by-service basis.
Some U.S. communities have already adopted performance-based programs, and are reaping the benefits. Communities such as Sunnyvale California, Dayton Ohio, Dallas Texas and Phoenix Arizona all have full-fledged systems for documenting evidence that can then be used to evaluate governmental performance, such as saved tax dollars and levels of service, as well as many other quantifiable measures.
However, despite the growing evidence of the benefits of developing performance-based measurement systems, relatively few communities throughout the country have implemented systems for measuring the performance of their government. The cities that have are at the vanguard of a movement that might possibly probably revolutionize public sector decision making. The National Civic League strongly encourages other communities to follow suit.
Performance measurement will not supplant political judgement and profession experience, but it will supplement them. Performance measurement, therefore, is not offered as a panacea for municipal ills but rather as a component of good management.
For information on how the concepts and techniques presented in this column can be applied in your community, or for a copy of the 1999 Revised Civic Index or a copy of Measuring City Hall Performance: Finally, A How-To Guide, contact the National Civic League by e-mail at ncl@ncl.org; on the world wide web at www.ncl.org; or by phone at (303) 571-4343.
Full List of Local Government Functions
Local Government Responsibilities
DESCRIPTION:
The Constitution states the local municipalities are responsible for the following:
beaches and amusement facilities
billboards and the display of advertisements in public places
cemeteries, funeral parlours and crematoria
cleansing
control of public nuisances
control of undertakings that sell liquor to the public
facilities for the accommodation, care and burial of animals
fencing and fences
licensing of dogs
licensing and control of undertakings that sell food to the public
local amenities
local sport facilities
markets
municipal abattoirs
municipal parks and recreation
municipal roads
noise pollution
pounds
public places
refuse removal, refuse dumps and solid waste disposal
street trading
street lighting
traffic and parking.
DESCRIPTION:
The Constitution states the local municipalities are responsible for the following:
beaches and amusement facilities
billboards and the display of advertisements in public places
cemeteries, funeral parlours and crematoria
cleansing
control of public nuisances
control of undertakings that sell liquor to the public
facilities for the accommodation, care and burial of animals
fencing and fences
licensing of dogs
licensing and control of undertakings that sell food to the public
local amenities
local sport facilities
markets
municipal abattoirs
municipal parks and recreation
municipal roads
noise pollution
pounds
public places
refuse removal, refuse dumps and solid waste disposal
street trading
street lighting
traffic and parking.
Local Government - Solving Problems by: Al Arnold
"Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable." John Kenneth Galbraith
Oh, how true! When you have a problem in your personal life, does your options for solving that problem come down to the “lesser of two evils?” Probably so. If your options for solving your problem are good or excellent choices, you don't have a problem, you have an opportunity.
Same in local government. When local government has a “problem” the choices they have are the “lesser of two evils.” Or, as Mr. Galbraith would say “between the disastrous and the unpalatable.”
It is truly unfortunate that local elected officials do not admit this, when discussing problem issues in public. This dilemma is certainly discussed in private between individuals involved in the decision making process. But, it is rare when a local official publicly states that the problem they are facing has no good solution. The options available consist between “the disastrous and the unpalatable.”
On top of that, add into the equation that elected local government officials who are making these decisions, are amateurs. Amateurs make mistakes. Lots of mistakes. So when choosing between those “lesser of two evils” they can often choose the worst of the choices.
Run government like a business! How many times have we heard, or maybe even said that?
How many businesses do you know, when looking for a new member for their Board of Directors throw the position open to amateurs, with absolutely no experience? Or, do they look for the best, most experienced person they can find to help guide them into the future?
Is it any wonder that some local governments bumble along? Is it any wonder that John Q. Public gets disenfranchised with the system?
We know that problems aren't going to go away. We also know we aren't going to change the way local elected officials are hired. Is there anything that can help this process along?
Yes, there is. The solution involves you, your friends and your neighbors. You may find this solution "unpalatable."
1) Involvement. Citizen Involvement. Citizens need to go to meetings. You need to go to meetings.
2) Citizens need to be there to give support and encouragement to these rank amateurs who are attempting to do their best under very difficult conditions. They are doing a job that must be done by someone.
3) Citizens who may have expertise on particular issues need to give their constructive input before the decisions are made ... not after.
Local elected officials universally lament the fact that citizens avoid attending meetings where their input is not just invited, but needed. These local officials also acknowledge the fact that they are amateurs and do not have the experience on many issues, that they need to make decisions.
Silence by citizens can be deafening, and destructive.
Your local government needs you to become involved!
Copyright 2006 Al Arnold
About The Author
Al Arnold fights Local Political Apathy at http://WWW.LocalPolitics101.US . Join the movement to attend one meeting a year. Sign up for monthly ezine update on progress of the movement to attend one local government meeting a year. He is the author of Moving Mountains and Molehills Local Politics 101
Supporting Blog
Blogs for Local Governments
May 6, 2005, By Trudy W. Schuett
When was the last time you heard something like this from a citizen/constituent?"Thanks for explaining the situation. I had misunderstood the way things work, and didn't realize how easy it actually is to get someone to help me with my problem."Probably not very often -- or ever.Governments and their agencies at all levels, from the smallest township to densely-populated states, are trying harder than ever before to be more approachable, and accessible to the residents of the area they serve.In the past, public meetings and traditional media were the mainstay of communication. Unless there is a "big" issue affecting a lot of people, these meetings are sparsely attended by the general public. Public information officers and departments work hard to see the public is informed on the operations of government, and traditional media (the papers, the TV and radio stations) do the best they can to cooperate.Outside of election years, and those times when those "big" issues emerge, the public pretty much goes about their business, blissfully unaware of the workings of their local governments. Those times when everything is working well, and it's not an election year are the times when you're least likely to hear from citizens, even though this would be the time when governments could best educate and inform.Web sites have gone a long way in making government more accessible. Los Angeles County has put most of its public documents online, saving everyone time and money, and you can get birth and death certificates from most states by filling out forms online. There are dozens of examples of ways to do business with a state or local government online, not to mention the ability to contact elected officials and various departments with questions or concerns.Here in Yuma AZ, one of our County Supervisors, Lucy Shipp, holds monthly luncheons at a local restaurant to make herself more available to her constituency, as does City Council member Scott Johnson.While these are great ways to even out the spaces between times of crisis and times when the public "forgets" about their governments, there is still more that can be done. Blogs can make a difference here. Not only elected officials, but various departments could also use a blog to explain what's going on and how things work.Elected officials can make themselves available for questions, and ask questions of their own of a segment of the public they perhaps could not have reached before. Those who can't attend public meetings in person, or even those who do, can see why a City Council member voted the way he did on an issue, straight from the horse's mouth. The official could also choose to use their blog to show their more-human side, talk about their hobbies or families, or conduct informal discussions on issues they feel need to be addressed. All of this is done without the filter of media, and their own restrictions on airtime and page space.Government departments could use blogs to explain how things work, and how their jobs fit into the larger scheme of "keeping things going." For example, somebody from the parks department could talk about why we have parks, how things like playground equipment and restroom facilities have changed over time, and why that is. A staffer from Administration could explain how things like local ordinances and laws come about, and how citizens can take a more-active role in this process. Each department has its unique perspective on their part of the work of government; who better to inform the public than the experts themselves?In this election year, some localities are giving candidates for local office their own blogs, for the purpose of giving the public a better way of learning their positions on issues, and their intentions for the future. It's an ongoing Q&A session, conducted more efficiently (and at far less cost) than a series of local meetings or newspaper profiles could ever be.These ideas are just the beginning of the variety of ways governments can use blogs. Remember, a blog does not require any specialized abilities. It's not one more job for the already-overloaded IT department. It's not a very big job for anyone. Once the blog is established it takes no more time than writing an e-mail. They don't need to be updated every day or every week, and they don't require lengthy entries, or even that all entries be the same length. Because a blog is so easily used, your designated bloggers can make blog entries themselves at any time of day or night, w
hen it fits their schedule.It is a very small investment in terms of time and money, with a positive return in encouraging citizen participation. Reprinted from Global PR Week.Trudy W. Schuett maintains Yuma County's Yuma Technology Consortium blog.Her main blog is WOLves.
May 6, 2005, By Trudy W. Schuett
When was the last time you heard something like this from a citizen/constituent?"Thanks for explaining the situation. I had misunderstood the way things work, and didn't realize how easy it actually is to get someone to help me with my problem."Probably not very often -- or ever.Governments and their agencies at all levels, from the smallest township to densely-populated states, are trying harder than ever before to be more approachable, and accessible to the residents of the area they serve.In the past, public meetings and traditional media were the mainstay of communication. Unless there is a "big" issue affecting a lot of people, these meetings are sparsely attended by the general public. Public information officers and departments work hard to see the public is informed on the operations of government, and traditional media (the papers, the TV and radio stations) do the best they can to cooperate.Outside of election years, and those times when those "big" issues emerge, the public pretty much goes about their business, blissfully unaware of the workings of their local governments. Those times when everything is working well, and it's not an election year are the times when you're least likely to hear from citizens, even though this would be the time when governments could best educate and inform.Web sites have gone a long way in making government more accessible. Los Angeles County has put most of its public documents online, saving everyone time and money, and you can get birth and death certificates from most states by filling out forms online. There are dozens of examples of ways to do business with a state or local government online, not to mention the ability to contact elected officials and various departments with questions or concerns.Here in Yuma AZ, one of our County Supervisors, Lucy Shipp, holds monthly luncheons at a local restaurant to make herself more available to her constituency, as does City Council member Scott Johnson.While these are great ways to even out the spaces between times of crisis and times when the public "forgets" about their governments, there is still more that can be done. Blogs can make a difference here. Not only elected officials, but various departments could also use a blog to explain what's going on and how things work.Elected officials can make themselves available for questions, and ask questions of their own of a segment of the public they perhaps could not have reached before. Those who can't attend public meetings in person, or even those who do, can see why a City Council member voted the way he did on an issue, straight from the horse's mouth. The official could also choose to use their blog to show their more-human side, talk about their hobbies or families, or conduct informal discussions on issues they feel need to be addressed. All of this is done without the filter of media, and their own restrictions on airtime and page space.Government departments could use blogs to explain how things work, and how their jobs fit into the larger scheme of "keeping things going." For example, somebody from the parks department could talk about why we have parks, how things like playground equipment and restroom facilities have changed over time, and why that is. A staffer from Administration could explain how things like local ordinances and laws come about, and how citizens can take a more-active role in this process. Each department has its unique perspective on their part of the work of government; who better to inform the public than the experts themselves?In this election year, some localities are giving candidates for local office their own blogs, for the purpose of giving the public a better way of learning their positions on issues, and their intentions for the future. It's an ongoing Q&A session, conducted more efficiently (and at far less cost) than a series of local meetings or newspaper profiles could ever be.These ideas are just the beginning of the variety of ways governments can use blogs. Remember, a blog does not require any specialized abilities. It's not one more job for the already-overloaded IT department. It's not a very big job for anyone. Once the blog is established it takes no more time than writing an e-mail. They don't need to be updated every day or every week, and they don't require lengthy entries, or even that all entries be the same length. Because a blog is so easily used, your designated bloggers can make blog entries themselves at any time of day or night, w
hen it fits their schedule.It is a very small investment in terms of time and money, with a positive return in encouraging citizen participation. Reprinted from Global PR Week.Trudy W. Schuett maintains Yuma County's Yuma Technology Consortium blog.Her main blog is WOLves.
Financial Problems
Financial Problems In Local Government
1 LOCAL GOVERNMENT’S FINANCIAL CHALLENGES A fresh look at local government’s deliver obligations and resource requirements is needed. HILDEGARDE FAST makes the case for a differentiated approach. It is common knowledge that many municipalities in South Africa are financially in dire straits. In the public discourse, the focus is often on operational issues such as poor revenue collection, unsustainable debt burdens, and lack of financial management capacity. In seeking to understand the financial challenges facing municipalities, it is important first to take a step back and ask broader questions, namely: What is local government required to do? Where should the resources come from? And is there a need to change the current intergovernmental fiscal system to ensure that local government can do its job? Constitutional mandate Municipalities are given five over-arching tasks in Chapter 7 of the Constitution: to govern in a democratic manner, to ensure the provision of basic services, to promote social and economic development, to promote a safe and healthy environment, and to encourage community participation in local government. The specific functions assigned to municipalities are subsequently listed in part B of schedules 4 and 5 of the Constitution. Delivering on these mandates invariably has financial implications. Whether it is extension of infrastructure for basic services or promotion of economic development, municipalities require resources to perform their constitutional functions. Revenue sources Municipalities have two main sources of revenue, namely own revenue and intergovernmental transfers. Own revenue consists primarily of revenue from property rates and surpluses generated on electricity and water accounts. It is important for municipalities to balance these revenue sources appropriately. A recent study undertaken by the Financial and Fiscal Commission (FFC) has shown that some municipalities do not maximise some...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)