Justices Say Cities Don’t Have to Enforce ADA

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) – The city of Hays has no legal responsibility to enforce state law requiring older hotels, restaurants and other such buildings to be accessible to people with disabilities, the Kansas Supreme Court was told Tuesday.

But those challenging that position say the city is wrong and point to a lower court ruling ordering the city to enforce the law.

At issue is the state law spelling out responsibility for enforcing the federal Americans with Disabilities Act in Kansas. An Ellis County District Court judge last year ruled the city has that responsibility. The city appealed the ruling.

A decision by the seven-member Supreme Court isn’t expected until at least Jan. 22.

Attorney John Bird, arguing for the city, told the court the issue `isn’t about whether federal or Kansas laws should be enforced, but rather how and by whom they are to be enforced.”

Wichita attorney David Calvert, representing the disabled plaintiffs, told the state’s highest court that changes in the 1994 law makes it clear that enforcement is the city’s responsibility _ even if it doesn’t want to do it.

“Their argument is that cities never had to enforce handicap standards and it would be too costly,” said Calvert, who made his case from his wheelchair. “The only way to make it enforceable is to have the cities enforce it.”

The arguments were delayed for a half hour so that a court reporter could transcribe the comments onto a computer screen in the courtroom, allowing three hearing-impaired spectators to follow along.

The ADA sets standards for access to people with disabilities, like Lou Ann Kibbee and Brian Atwell, who sued the city. Joining them is LINK Inc., a center for independent living.

The issue for the court is the role the city has in enforcing ADA with private businesses that opened their doors to the public before the 1990 law was in place.

There is no disagreement that cities must enforce the ADA for publicly financed building such as schools, courthouses and hospitals, and on buildings constructed after enactment of the federal law.

Justice Fred N. Six noted the trial judge ruled the law’s language wasn’t ambiguous _ as the city contended _ and that the statutes were changed in 1994 to give city attorneys discretion for enforcement.

“Why give the city authority only to supervise it on its own buildings?” Six said to Bird. “The legislative intent is to prohibit all types of discrimination.”

“Yes it is,” Bird replied.

The city argues that, in spelling out who would handle enforcement in Kansas, the Legislature removed the city’s responsibility for enforcement of that section.

Calvert said the lawsuit began because a motel-restaurant in Hays didn’t have a restroom accessible to wheelchairs.

The city was asked to require the business to make the necessary changes. But officials said that ADA enforcement on such businesses wasn’t its responsibility, but a job for the attorney general’s office.

Calvert said the attorney general’s role is oversight of enforcement, not carrying out the enforcement. NAD Press Release