                   MAKING THE ADA WORK FOR US
                           by Ed Eames

     Ed Eames is the President of the Fresno Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of California.

     For the reputed forty-three million disabled Americans, the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 has potentially far-
reaching effects. It is a civil rights bill reaching into every
facet of our lives including employment, transportation, leisure,
recreation, etc. With its emphasis on rights rather than
privileges, the ADA can become an important element in our fight
for independence and full integration into American society.
However, we as blind citizens must determine which provisions of
the Act and its attendant regulations should be used to further
our goals of security, equality, and opportunity.
     Based on recent experience, I want to explore three aspects
of the bill that have implications for me and other NFBers. These
are public transportation, car rental and prisoner rights.
     As a result of the ADA transportation regulations published
on September 6, 1991, every municipality with a public
transportation system was mandated to establish an ADA advisory
council. Members had to be drawn from the disability community,
as well as the transportation providers. This committee had to
work on a plan to comply with the regulations scheduled for
implementation on January 26, 1992. I was asked to join this
group in Fresno and currently serve as chairperson of the Fresno
Area Express (FAX) ADA Advisory Council.
     Since moving to Fresno five years ago and joining NFB, I
have appeared before several committees dealing with the unmet
needs of blind passengers using the public transportation system.
A request I made year after year was to have drivers announce
stops where two or more bus routes intersect and at other major
intersection points. I was always assured this request would be
taken into consideration, but nothing ever happened. Imagine my
joy, when I discovered the ADA regulations required this
accommodation! Not only would this be helpful to us as blind
passengers. It would also help visitors not familiar with the bus
system, seniors, those involved in conversations, and multitudes
of others.
     As chairperson of the ADA Advisory Council, I pushed for
involvement of the disabled community in sensitivity training for
drivers who would have to conform to the law. Many promises were
made to Council members about involvement, but we were not
consulted. Our Council strongly recommended discussions with the
drivers to inform them of the various elements of the law. Once
again, we got promises rather than action. Approximately a week
before implementation, drivers were notified by mail about the
need to announce stops. For several weeks after the starting
date, daily reminders were given to the drivers by central radio
dispatch indicating the legal requirement of making
announcements. Needless to say, many drivers resisted this change
in their usual routines.
     As chairperson of the Council, I wanted to avoid a direct
confrontation with the drivers while still obtaining compliance
with the law. I invited bus driver union representatives to our
meetings and got them involved in the advisory process. Despite
these efforts, I continued to hear about bus drivers' violating
the law by refusing to make announcements.
     On June 2, 1992, Lon Kafton, secretary of our NFB chapter,
and I decided to investigate these complaints. Lon and I rode in
eight buses between the hours of 11:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Four
drivers announced stops; four did not. I then filed formal
complaints against the four non-announcers.
     Shortly after filing the complaints, I contacted a local
television station about this issue. They sent a reporter and a
camera man to ride with me on two buses. In the presence of the
television camera, both bus drivers announced stops. In spite of
this compliance, the reporter put together a story based on my
letter of complaint to the head of FAX and his response. Current
reports indicate a much greater compliance with this element of
the law. Since the filing of the complaints and the airing of the
story, every bus driver with whom I have ridden has announced
stops.
     In April I flew to Phoenix, Arizona, with my wife, Toni, and
a sighted friend, Deb Harper. Several weeks prior to the trip, we
arranged to rent a car at the airport from Dollar car rentals.
When we arrived at the airport, the counter clerk refused to rent
to us because we wanted to charge the car on our credit card and
have Deb as the driver. The clerk was adamant in his position
that this was company policy. I asked to speak with his
supervisor, who proceeded with the same litany: "It's company
policy." Recognizing the futility of my efforts, I went to Budget
car rentals, where I had no problem renting a car with Deb as
listed driver and me as payee. Unfortunately, I had to pay more
for the Budget car, since I had not made an advanced reservation.
     After returning home, I filed a complaint with the United
States Department of Justice. I was contacted at the end of June
by a lawyer working for the Department. She is investigating the
matter and believes my rights under the ADA have been violated.
She suggested that in addition to the federal action, I hire a
private lawyer and pursue the matter in the civil courts. This is
an action I am considering.
     Two years ago Willie, a member of our local NFB chapter, was
convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to fifteen years
to life in prison. He is appealing his conviction and wants
access to the prison law library in order to participate in
preparing his appeal. During the last two decades, federal courts
have guaranteed these rights to participate in the appeals
process for all prisoners.
     Willie is legally blind and needs magnification in order to
read print material. The authorities in the California Department
of Corrections claim Willie has the same access rights to the law
library as all other prisoners. In fact, they suggest that if he
needs help locating necessary law books, a library clerk can
provide assistance. When I pointed out this would not give Willie
access to the material since he can't read the books, they did
not think this was a relevant issue.
     After several attempts to break through the bureaucracy,
Toni and I, as NFB field representatives, filed a complaint with
the U.S. Department of Justice in late January. Since our filing
this complaint, Willie has been transferred to the California
Medical Facility at Vacaville. However, he still has no access to
the law library.
     The Department of Justice is investigating our complaint.
Richard Waters, the lawyer in charge of the case, has obtained
permission to investigate conditions at Vacaville. He will be
coming to California and has asked us to join him in his
investigation. We plan to do so.
     It should be obvious from these three ADA-related issues
that this legislation can be used to further our goals of equal
rights and opportunities. However, it is up to us to learn the
full implications of the law and use it to further our cause. One
of Dr. Jernigan's famous rallying cries was to join him on the
barricades. In a similar fashion, I urge all NFBers to gather
together on the ADA compliance battlefront.
