- LanguageAfrikaans Argentina AzÉrbaycanca
á¥áá áá£áá Äesky Ãslenska
áá¶áá¶ááááá à¤à¥à¤à¤à¤£à¥ বাà¦à¦²à¦¾
தமிழ௠à²à²¨à³à²¨à²¡ ภาษาà¹à¸à¸¢
ä¸æ (ç¹é«) ä¸æ (é¦æ¸¯) Bahasa Indonesia
Brasil Brezhoneg CatalÃ
ç®ä½ä¸æ Dansk Deutsch
Dhivehi English English
English Español Esperanto
Estonian Finnish Français
Français Gaeilge Galego
Hrvatski Italiano Îλληνικά
íêµì´ LatvieÅ¡u Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuviu Magyar Malay
Nederlands Norwegian nynorsk Norwegian
Polski Português RomânÄ
Slovenšcina Slovensky Srpski
Svenska Türkçe Tiếng Viá»t
Ù¾Ø§Ø±Ø³Û æ¥æ¬èª ÐÑлгаÑÑки
ÐакедонÑки Ðонгол Ð ÑÑÑкий
СÑпÑки УкÑаÑнÑÑка ×¢×ר×ת
اÙعربÙØ© اÙعربÙØ©
Home / Albums / Tag lifts on all NEW buses 20
- ADAPT (97)
Rocky Mountain News, Tues., Oct. 19, 1992 Denver, Colo. RTD seeks to nullify handicap law By SUE LINDSAY News Staff Another skirmish in the ongoing battle waged by Denver’s handicapped to gain access to the city's bus system was staged Monday in Denver District Court, with the Regional Transportation District asking the court to declare the Colorado Handicapped Act unconstitutional. An organization of the handicapped has asked Judge Harold D. Reed to order RTD to purchase no buses that won't accommodate the handicapped and to retrofit older buses according to an agreement reached during a federal court case in 1979. The district court suit, filed in January, was triggered by RTD’s purchase of 89 buses to be delivered in 1983 without wheelchair lifts. RTD is trying to sidestep the provisions of that agreement, arguing that the federal regulations on which it was based no longer exist. RTD also wants the judge to declare the Colorado Handicapped Act unconstitutional because it is overbroad and too vague to be followed. THE JUDGE HEARD arguments by both sides Monday and said he will rule on the matter Nov. 9. Lawrence D. Stone, an attorney representing RTD, argued that the Colorado Handicapped Act is merely an expression of the Legislature's intention of how the handicapped should be treated. Stone argued that the statute prohibits discrimination but doe§n’t require any specific “affirmative actions” — such as buying only buses that contain wheelchair lifts. “The Legislature intended to enact the statute simply as an encouragement for the handicapped to be brought into the mainstream of society," Stone said. “They were encouraging rather than mandating better service for the handicapped. Any efforts are voluntary, and the voluntary efforts of RTD have been substantial.” Stone said that 50 percent of RTD buses are accessible to the handicapped during rush hour and all of them are during non-peak hours of operation. Stone also argued that the statute, which sets maximum criminal misdemeanor penalties of up to 60 days in jail and a $100 fine, is too vague and too broad to be enforced. Stone said the act doesn’t specifically define who is included and what must be done to comply with the statute. “We must guess at its meaning,” Stone said. "lt is clear that the act is a declaration of state policy. But is it a crime to fail to heed a policy of the state?” Stone argued that, apart from the Colorado statute, lawyers for the handicapped have misconstrued the meaning of a stipulation signed by RTD to resolve a federal suit over the handicapped buses issue. John Holland, an attorney representing the Atlantis Community, which filed the suit, said he and his clients understood that RTD was agreeing to purchase buses with wheelchair lifts and retrofit all buses purchased after February 1977 in compliance with federal regulations in effect at the time. Stone said RTD merely agreed that its “intention” was to achieve accessibility at the earliest practical date. He argued that RTD never promised that all of its buses would accommodate the handicapped. Calling the dispute “a legal and political war between the disabled and RTD," Holland said, "There was no doubt whatsoever that RTD knew for certain (that) what the plaintiffs wanted was total accessibility of buses. This has been our consistent demand everywhere. It's very simple what the agreement means. lt means that all buses must be made wheelchair accessible.” HOLLAND CHARGED THAT RTD was trying to weasel out of the agreement because the federal regulation in effect at the time it was reached has changed. At the time, federal regulations made it mandatory that new buses accommodate the handicapped. The mandatory regulation was dropped in July 1981, leaving the earlier regulation in force that encourages localities to do this and provides federal funding for the wheelchair lifts. “RTD made an agreement with us, and now RTD argues that it should not be bound by the settlement but to the law as it evolves and changes," Holland said. Reed called the stipulation “about as unclear a stipulation as I’ve ever read in my life. I don’t know what it means yet." The judge wondered aloud whether the parties had purposely used “tortured language” to solve the immediate problem, knowing they would wind up back in court. - ADAPT (127)
Rocky Mountain News 8/5/83 RTD proposes bus changes for disabled By Tony Pugh, Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer The Regional Transportation District, in an open forum with handicapped citizens Thursday, introduced changes designed to make buses more accessible for disabled riders. Mike Smith, director of transit operations, outlined the proposed improvements, which include a new material to improve traction on bus wheelchair lifts and a metal “kickplate,” designed to minimize wear on lifts from hitting curbs. A new rotary control panel, said to be easier for drivers to operate, and a new lift wiring system also were introduced. Although many people in the attendance voiced displeasure with bus driver insensitivity and mechanical failure of the lifts, others expressed gratitude to RTD for its efforts in accommodating handicapped riders. Bill West, chairman of RTD’s handicapped advisory council, said he is reasonably pleased with RTD officials’ commitment to the disabled community. “I think they’re committed to making the best of what they’ve been mandated to do, but I believe they have a tendency to focus more on the lifts rather than better driver training,” West said. Larry Ruiz, 29, typified the problems encountered by handicapped riders. Earlier this week, he was passed up by four buses as he waited at a stop outside Colorado General Hospital, said Ruiz, who is confined to a wheelchair. The first bus had no lift, the next two buses had lifts, but the drivers did not know how to operate them. After waiting more than two hours, the driver of the fourth bus called a HandyRide disabled vehicle which took Ruiz home. But that lift malfunctioned, Ruiz said. He had to be removed manually. This gathering was a forerunner to a meeting in late October between the American Public Transit Association and the newly formed American Disabled for Accessible Public Transit. A spokesman for the access group, Wade Blank, said it will made three demands to the association: * “Wheelchair accessibility by all public transit systems in the nation.” * “To serve notice to all bus manufacturers that only wheelchair accessible buses will be purchased by its members.” * “For the federal government to stand behind this moral position and develop laws and regulations supporting total access for the wheelchair bound public on public transit.” - ADAPT (104)
Denver Post Tuesday, January 19th, 1982 Editorials, Opinion, 2, 3 Weather 4 Ski Report, 4 Suit over Bus Lifts Hits RTD By Howard Pankratz, Denver Post Legal Affairs Writer Some of Denver’s handicapped, who believe the Regional Transportation District has broken a promise to install wheelchair lifts on 89 new buses, turned that belief into action Monday by suing the district. In a lengthy brief filed in Denver District Court, seven wheelchair-bound individuals and the Atlantis Community for the disabled accused the district of violating both state and civil law and a settlement reached in federal court several years ago. In that settlement, alleges the suit, RTD agreed that all new buses would have wheelchair-lift equipment. But that promise has been broken, said the suit, which asks that RTD be required to install lifts on 89 new buses due for delivery beginning next year and on all new equipment in the future. The Monday suit is based on RTD’s having contracted for 89 new buses, worth $21.3 million. The suit says that 80 percent of the purchase price is to be paid by the federal government. Originally, said lawyer John Holland, who represents the handicapped, all the buses were to have had lifts to make them accessible to the handicapped. But last November, the RTD board decided not to have lifts installed. The total cost of the lifts would be $1.1 million, with the federal government again paying 80 percent of the cost. The suit alleges that it wasn’t the cost, technical feasibility or the maintenance of the lifts that caused them to be dropped, but rather a decision by RTD to use the new buses on “express bus service” from which the handicapped are to be excluded. This, claimed the wheelchair-bound complaints, blatantly violates the state’s civil rights act. Reacting to that alleged broken promise, handicapped individuals demonstrated on the RTD properly, for three straight days in early January, an action that caused the district to go to court seeking an order banning such demonstrations. However, late last week, Denver District Judge Daniel Sparr told both sides he feared that if he issued a restraining order against the handicapped, it would only widen the gulf between the two sides. He noted that the handicapped had legal avenues to follow if they felt a promise had been broken. On Friday, heeding Sparr’s advice, the two sides reached an accord, whose points will be made public February 2. RTD lawyers Alan E. Richman and Russ Richardson said Monday that RTD has a policy of not commenting on such pending lawsuits. - ADAPT (258)
The Cincinnati Enquirer Saturday, May 24, 1986 Title: 8 bus protesters released; leaders to remain in jail by David Wells, The Cincinnati Enquirer A plea bargain resulted in freedom Friday for most of the disabled rights protesters arrested in Cincinnati this week. But three leaders of the group will have to spend another eight days in jail. “I believe they made-their point,” defense attorney Joni Wilkens said of those released. “I think things escalated further than anyone wanted them to, and this was the best way to resolve the situation." The protesters are all members of ADAPT (American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation). The group, which is based in Denver, was in Cincinnati this week to protest the policies of Queen City Metro and the American Public Transit Association, which was having a convention at the Westin Hotel. The group wants Metro to install wheelchair lifts on any new buses it buys. It wants the transit association to support full access for the disabled to all public transportation. - ADAPT (306)
Disability Rag September/October 1987 RAGOUT WHAT'S COOKIN' [This article continues in ADAPT 305 but all the text has been included here for easier reading.] At the bottom of the page is a cute cartoon of a bus driving along crammed full of folks. “There's been more public discussion in 5 days than there’d been in 5 years" “Now we’re taken more seriously” —As time for ADAPT demonstrations in San Francisco draw near, this story of how one local disability group responded to the influx of ADAPT members from all over the country shows how ADAPT’s style of direct action can work with local disability groups more accustomed to working “within the system." - ed. When ADAPT members from all over the country began descending on Phoenix this spring to protest at the American Public Transit Association’s regional meeting, staff of the Arizona Bridge to Independent Living felt some anxiety over where our loyalties lay. The City of Phoenix had been receptive to the disability community. They'd purchased only accessible buses the last three years. Phoenix's Regional Public Transportation Association had spent hundreds of hours working with us. Yet we also knew from brief interaction with ADAPT that their strongly-worded opinions best expressed our frustration and anger at the system's unwillingness to commit to 100% accessibility. ABIL decided to work with both groups. Prior to their coming, we discussed with ADAPT the guidelines they’d follow in deciding what level of civil disobedience would be involved. We found ADAPT’s demand — that cities purchase only accessible buses in the normal course of replacing a fleet — a reasonable one. ADAPT wasn’t demanding bus systems retrofit their buses, or that they immediately replace all their buses with lift-equipped ones — just a long-term commitment to change. " A month before the APTA meeting, ABIL met with RPTA officials to discuss our and ADAPT's demands for accessibility. To our surprise, RPTA suggested their commitment be put in writing and adopted by their board! ADAPT was already having an effect — and they weren't even in town yet! The day before, ADAPT arrived. ABIL hosted a meeting for those disabled people from all over the community who were most likely to be contacted by media or others regarding the APTA/ADAPT confrontation. A consensus emerged that the disability community would maintain a united front; that the local community's interests were the same as ADAPT’s and that any public discussion beyond that — especially regarding ADAPT's "techniques" — would simply distract from the central issue: accessible mass transit. This single act of meeting and making these decisions was the thing most responsible for the success of our efforts. By spreading the word, we were able to keep from being forced into a public debate over the differences between persons with disabilities rather than focusing the debate on our common interest —- accessible public transit. Negative comments from a few individuals in the community were lost among the events of the next several days. ABIL found itself taking an increasingly larger role as protests and police reaction escalated, with some of us participating in the demonstrations, others calling politicians and media, putting pressure on local bureaucrats and helping to keep lines of communication open. The mayor of Phoenix, in the midst of the media barrage, made a public statement supporting the purchase of accessible buses. After APTA and ADAPT had left Phoenix, ABIL set up a meeting between the Mayor and local ADAPT members. It was the first time the Mayor had sat down with members of the disability community to discuss transportation. Although he and some transit system officials were still angry about the demonstrations, they were taking us more seriously. That's a tradeoff we’re willing to make. The ADAPT experience was a positive one for ABIL and the disability community in Phoenix. The events caused more public discussion about accessible public transit in those five days than there had been in Phoenix in the past five years. The longer the topic stayed in the news, the greater appreciation the public had for the need for accessible public transit. — Robert E. Michaels Executive Director Arizona Bridge to Independent Living, ABIL.