💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

IreneC (North Carolina)
Posts: 111
Posted:
Our board is looking at doing monthly walk throughs and issueing citation letters to those who are not in accordance to our rules and cc&rs. This is in 100% agreement with the whole board including myself. In the past our board would allow board members to be an accidental over sight to enforcement.

My spouse is disabled. He has the state issued handicap plaquard and is able to park in our disabled parking without a hitch. My spouse although disabled is able to be mobile, drive and do some basic light errands like a small grocery store run. He uses a small colapsable wire wheeled cart to take groceries from his car to our unit on the 4th floor without the cart being handy it would be impossible. My husbands disease is progressive, neurological in nature and eventually will be wheel chair bound. He needs the cart to make his life as normal as possible and also give him a sense of independence.

Last night in our executive session it was brought to my attention that 3 out of 4 board members were annoyed at the cart being left in the garage to be used to tranport groceries. When the cart is not in use it is in our unit. The cart is wheeled to the garage when my husband is going out. When he gets back in he takes the goods he purchased and takes the cart upstairs until his next trip out. He drive a small 2 seater car. The cart has to stay in the garage near the parking space and can't be taken with him.

The fact that the cart incident was brought up didn't offend me, but made me understand my fellow board's ignorance to those who have limited mobility. I plan on bringing this up at our next executive session and askign for a Waiver if you will in regards to the enforcement of the no cart request.
IreneC (North Carolina)
Posts: 111
Posted:
I also forgot to add with the initial request to remove the cart and keep in our car ( can't happen 2 seater) that I mentioned my husband's disabled. One board member actually stated " so am I and I don't even drive". The board member is legally blind.. and my spouse has multiple sclerosis. The attmept to down play one disablility against another althought annoying was not addressed. It is so hard not to get personal with these kinds of responses.
EllenS1 (Florida)
Posts: 1,148
Posted:
Now I've heard everything. How hard hearted and cruel can some people be? Not sure I have an answer but could the cart (since it is collapsable) be placed in front of your parked car. I don't even think you should have to take it to your unit. Surely there must be space in the garage for it. Good luck!
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Exactly WHAT CC&R is the cart being there while the car is gone a violation of?

I can't imagine how that would be worded.

I would have asked the other "disabled" person, "Oh, so you have a mental capacity issue then?"

jerk.

SusanW1 (Michigan)
Posts: 5,202
Posted:
What "garage" is this that the cart is being left in? A community one? or your private one?

If it were a bike, stroller or wheelchair, would it be handled differently?

Come on, surely your Board can come up with a solution that satisfies all.
IreneC (North Carolina)
Posts: 111
Posted:
Our cc&r or rules specifically state that nothing other and a car, or motorcycle can be in our parking stalls. Bikes are allowed with the approved mounted wall rack, that is all that is allowed in our garage. It is an open sub terrain garage. Our board's ex president is bit thick in the head and I will be asking for them to grant a waiver under the American Disabilities Act or I will seek legal counsel. They have no clue how serious this is.
EllenS1 (Florida)
Posts: 1,148
Posted:
Good for you...go for it. But can't you appeal to a city councilman to intercede so you don't have to go to the expense of an attorney? If you do have to go the legal path I certainly hope the assn would have to pay for your costs.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Oh, that's an excellent idea, Ellen, and I've forgotten how often I've actually used that in the past.

I've had our councilman talk to our board once or twice about various things they've been 'stubborn" on before.

Works like a charm.

IreneC (North Carolina)
Posts: 111
Posted:
I will consider this, but first I must see how these things pan out as far as how "thick skulled" some of our members are, but I will be completely on this like white on rice. The comment of "I am disabled" too from a board member made me feel like saying. OK, lets take the spot light of what I am saying and put it on you... what a complete tard.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
before you count on tossing the ADA card into the game Irene, make sure your HOA is regulated by it (some are, many are not). If it is not, tossing that argument into the mix makes you look less informed, and that won't help your cause.

KirkW1 (Texas)
Posts: 1,665
Posted:
Brian,

In case you are not aware, if Irene lives in the US then her HOA is in fact regulated by the ADA and other related laws as they pertain to fair housing. In short, if a jury finds that a demand that a disabled person can not leave a cart in the stall then that person's civil rights have been violated. It is really that cut and dried.

Irene, before you go to court, you should simply insist that the board consult the attorney. They will have no choice should you retain an attorney so they may as well get off on the right foot. The attorney certainly will understand that any reasonable person would think the matter a small one and advise them as such.

If your board doesn't have enough sense to listen to the attorney, then you should take the following steps:
1) Resign from the board
2) Start the recall process and perhaps run again.

As for the bone headed blind person, it fails to really surprise me. Many disabled people are bone headed with the belief that those with "lessor" disabilities should suck it. But if you want to get on the person's nerves pretend they are deaf. It drives all my blind friends (including my spouse) crazy and yet is very common. People talk louder to blind people regularly.

Kirk
IreneC (North Carolina)
Posts: 111
Posted:
I will do more research on this subject.. and will follow up with ya'll. It is just annoying considering that after 2 years I am just now being asked to not put the cart there. The bone headed blind person is a twit, she thinks we actually store the cart in the garage... walk it down after we get the groceries.. I tried to explain the thing is there only when we are out going to get stuff.. waiting for our return to take it upstairs again. She is not only blind, but simple minded and a bit slow with processing.... I will just let her be, but if I do get resistance I will research an atty..... because it may make it just worth my while. Individual board members can be sued.. she will be the first on my list..... just to prove a point.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
Actually Kirk, i am not aware. I have lived in two HOAs, neither of which was subject to the ADA or the Fair Housing Act. That's why i suggested she be very sure that hers IS covered by the ADA before she tosses that card onto the table. I would not want her to find out she is living in one of the many that have nothing to do with the ADA.

For example, the ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in employment, State and local government, public accommodations,
commercial facilities, transportation, and telecommunications. It also applies to the United States Congress.

So, in general, unless her HOA is EMPLOYING her husband, unless the HOA is a government agency, offers accommodations to the public on a rental/retail basis, provides commercial facilities, transportation services to the public, or is a telecommunication business, the ADA doesn't apply. Or, of course, unless her HOA is Congress itself.

Of those areas, the one that might apply to SOME HOA's is the public accommodation or commercial facility, which is why I told her to be sure. My HOA's never rented homes, rooms, pools, etc. to the general public, so they were never covered by the ADA. If hers does, then they are.
MikeS1
Posts: 668
Posted:
Brian - You comments to Kirk on spot on. No where in this posting e (that I can see) is any references to whether this is a community of single family attached (townhomes), or patio homes, condos, Fee simple, etc. and this has a bearing on how the law applies here. We live in a townhome community (Fee simple-Not condo) and we went down this road before with one of residents. Our attorney advised us that we were not subject to the doctrine of "Reasonable Accomodation" and/or ADA, unless of course we were building or remodeling a new community center or common area building. However if we lived in a Condominium, Reasonable accomodation might play a role. This question should definitely be answered by an attorney.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
any follow up Kirk?
GloriaM (North Carolina)
Posts: 829
Posted:
Irene:

The Fair Housing Act and the ADA does apply to everyone living in the USA. These are Federal laws and your President should be told to consult with the HOA's attorney before wasting anyone's time or money. Because you would clearly win in this case.

How silly a cart used for a disabled person parked rather nicely in the stall where others park motorcycles and your President wants you to remove it? The courts want "reasonable" restrictions and it seems to me your HOA attorney needs to explain to your President she is being unreasonable.

If everyone remembers Bill a while ago and his RV, he won in court because he was disabled. Now this is not to say everyone with a disability can claim they need to fence in the front yard so they don't have to walk their dogs. Because such a scenario has already gone through the courts and the woman had to remove her fence to the back of the home.

Go to the board and presnet your case and ask them to be reasonable. Good Luck Irene.
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posted:

Irene,
Is there a reasonable way that the cart could be hung from a "hook" because you stated that bike hooks are allowed? Then it would be off of the ground. Do you have an assigned space? If so, there should be no one that this cart is interfering with.

I see where the Board is trying to enforce this but there is a line that they can cross to become unreasonable and I think that they may have.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By GloriaM on 06/07/2008 1:17 PM
Irene:

The Fair Housing Act and the ADA does apply to everyone living in the USA.

Please back this statement up with facts.

I will personally stake $50,000, right here, to Gloria or Kirk if they can prove that the ADA applies to everyone living in the USA. It cannot be done, they cannot do it, because that statement is untrue.

The ADA has limits. It does NOT cover everything, everyone, etc. READ THE LAW. Or, if you cannot be responsible enough to actually read the statute before you make such statements, then read the FAQ's the US Government supplies about it.

From the ADA Publication: ADA Questions and Answers:

Is the Federal government covered by the ADA?

A. The ADA does not cover the executive branch of the Federal government.

Q. Does the ADA cover private apartments and private homes?

A. The ADA does not cover strictly residential private apartments and homes. If, however, a place of public accommodation, such as a doctor's office or day care center, is located in a private residence, those portions of the residence used for that purpose are subject to the ADA's requirements.

there are lots of other "people living in the US" that the ADA doesn't cover, including ALL EMPLOYERS with less than 15 employees. It doesn't cover me either.

CaroleJ (Georgia)
Posts: 70
Posted:
On March 5, 2008, HUD and the Department of Justice Released New Guidance on "Reasonable Modifications" under the Fair Housing Act.

Written in an FAQ format, Question 2 asks 2. Who must comply with the Fair Housing Act’s reasonable accommodation requirements?

Answer:Any person or entity engaging in prohibited conduct – i.e., refusing to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford a person with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling – may be held liable unless they fall within an exception to the Act’s coverage. Courts have applied the Act to individuals, corporations, associations and others involved in the provision of housing and residential lending, including property owners, housing managers, homeowners and condominium associations, lenders, real estate agents, and brokerage services. Courts have also applied the Act to state and local governments, most often in the context of exclusionary zoning or other land-use decisions.... [emphasis mine]

There are a couple of specific exemptions, but they ONLY apply to: a private individual owner who sells his own home so long as he (1) does not own more than three single-family homes; (2) does not use a real estate agent and does not employ any discriminatory advertising or notices; (3) has not engaged in a similar sale of a home within a 24-month period; and (4) is not in the business of selling or renting dwellings. The reasonable accommodation requirements of the Fair Housing Act also do not apply to owner-occupied buildings that have four or fewer dwelling units.

The questions and answers are clear and concise, and it will be difficult for even stubborn boards to get around them. You shouldn't need any attorney, but....

The Press Release with links to the pertinent documents, including information by state.

Good luck to you. Someday I would love to see common sense and humanitarian principles as part of CCRs. Achieving world peace would probably be an easier goal. :-)

CaroleJ (Georgia)
Posts: 70
Posted:
Brian B, shall I send you my address? A certified check or money order will be just fine. Thanks!
BruceF1 (Connecticut)
Posts: 2,535
Posted:
Brian,

The attached document may interest you.
📎 Attachments (1):

⏸ Downloads temporarily unavailable

📄168461751471.pdf(176 KB)
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
Carol, i would be happy to mail you that check, as soon as you explain to me how your answer meets the conditions of the bet.

Kirk and Gloria both stated that the ADA applied to EVERYONE LIVING IN AMERICA. right there, in your own cut and paste from the ADA FAQ, there is a statement that the law DOES NOT APPLY (ie, exemption) to owners of single family homes who do not use real estate agents to sell, etc..

So, how exactly do you claim that the ADA, with this section that specifically mentions the people living in America who aren't covered b it, covers every person living in America?

DonN (Michigan)
Posts: 357
Posted:
While the statutory and case law may be different from state to state, my expectation is that accommodation for the disabled is supported in law in every state. Restrictive covenants are favored by public policy. Whether in statutory law (it appears to be in the fair housing act), I doubt that courts would rule against reasonable accommocations for the special conditions described. It is impossible for the CC&Rs to anticipate all the possible "public policy" issues that might arise.

BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
By the way Carol, Kirk and Gloria spoke of the ADA, you quoted from the Fair Housing Act.

two totally separate pieces of legislation. My money is still safe.
CaroleJ (Georgia)
Posts: 70
Posted:
Hi Brian - I clearly quoted from the Fair Housing Act. Please note opening quote below:

Quote:
Posted By CaroleJ on 06/08/2008 6:26 AM
On March 5, 2008, HUD and the Department of Justice Released New Guidance on "Reasonable Modifications" under the Fair Housing Act.


And although some class of people may be exempted, the policy can still be considered as applying to them, just because of their exemption. Policies affect people they apply to and the ones they don't. We can agree they affect some people more and others less, but you weren't betting on the amount, just the affect.


However, my crystal does not foresee a $50K check heading my way from your way, but I enjoyed the exchange, nonetheless. So thanks for that part and it was a small victory to see that Irene should have an easier route towards accommodation. Fair deal?

With any luck, the new March 2008 guidance is attached for reference.
📎 Attachments (1):

⏸ Downloads temporarily unavailable

📄168305066658.pdf(176 KB)
CaroleJ (Georgia)
Posts: 70
Posted:
Hi Brian - I clearly quoted from the Fair Housing Act. Please note opening quote below:

Quote:
Posted By CaroleJ on 06/08/2008 6:26 AM
On March 5, 2008, HUD and the Department of Justice Released New Guidance on "Reasonable Modifications" under the Fair Housing Act.


You were talking about both. And they are both federal. Somewhere, a long time ago, I learned the order of succession for laws was Fed, State, Local (roughly). With HOAs, some local has been preempted when supplied by the HOA, but most are subject to some sort of zoning or building codes, at the least. Having said that, we move to...

And although some class of people may be exempted, the policy can still be considered as applying to them, just because of their exemption. Policies affect people they apply to and the ones they don't. We can agree they affect some people more and others less, but you weren't betting on the amount, just the affect.


However, my crystal does not foresee a $50K check heading my way from your way, but I enjoyed the exchange, nonetheless. So thanks for that part and it was a small victory to see that Irene should have an easier route towards accommodation. Fair deal?

With any luck, the new March 2008 Fair Housing (Federal) guidance is attached for reference.
📎 Attachments (1):

⏸ Downloads temporarily unavailable

📄1683969154.pdf(176 KB)
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
well, carol, to protect my $50,000, i still point out that the deal was to prove that the ADA covered every person living in America. Proving that the FHA does (or doesn't) means nothing. The bet was to prove that the statements Gloria and Kirk made about the ADA covering every living person in america was true.

Just because OTHER people were talking about the FHA doesn't mean I was. the only time the fair housing act entered my posts was when i quoted Gloria, and when i pointed out that your quote was from the FHA. I never claimed the FHA didn't cover the situation Irene had, i simply warned her to not toss the ADA law on the table without careful scrutiny.

And, while we are debating: i am not sure i agree with you that a law that exempts people from it's power "affects" those people. For instance, the Kansas law that I pay revenue tax on any marijuana I grow doesn't apply to me, because A) I am not a kansas citizen and B) I am not growing marijuana. Are you stating that I am "affected" by that law?

If so, then every person alive is affected (to some degree) by every law ever written, in every country. Are you affected by the Chinese law that allow only one child to be born to parents? Under your logic, you are. After all, they exempt everyone who isn't chinese and living in China from it, and that would be you.
GloriaM (North Carolina)
Posts: 829
Posted:
Brian:

Here is the ADA in its entirity, If you find an attorney who would not utilize this Act to protect their clients in part or in whole in any lawsuit HOA or not, then keep your $50,000.00; otherwise my Post Office Box is clearly stated on my signature line below this post. lol

Again this Act was enacted by the Senate and the House of Representives of the USA. It applies to every American. I hear a nice vacation in my future.....Read #3 "(3) discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists
in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations,
education, transportation, communication, recreation,
institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public
services"

An Act To establish a clear and comprehensive prohibition of
discrimination on the basis of disability.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America assembled, that this Act may be cited as the
"Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990".

* * *

FINDINGS AND PURPOSES

SEC. 12101. [Section 2]

(a) Findings. - The Congress finds that-

(1) some 43,000,000 Americans have one or more physical or mental
disabilities, and this number is increasing as the population as a whole
is growing older;

(2) historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate
individuals with disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms
of discrimination against individuals with disabilities continue to be a
serious and pervasive social problem;

(3) discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists
in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations,
education, transportation, communication, recreation,
institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public
services;

(4) unlike individuals who have experienced discrimination on the
basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, or age, individuals
who have experienced discrimination on the basis of disability have often
had no legal recourse to redress such discrimination;

(5) individuals with disabilities continually encounter various
forms of discrimination, including outright intentional exclusion, the
discriminatory effects of architectural, transportation, and communication
barriers, overprotective rules and policies, failure to make modifications
to existing facilities and practices, exclusionary qualification standards
and criteria, segregation, and relegation to lesser services, programs,
activities, benefits, jobs, or other opportunities;

(6) census data, national polls, and other studies have documented
that people with disabilities, as a group, occupy an inferior status in
our society, and are severely disadvantaged socially, vocationally,
economically, and educationally;

(7) individuals with disabilities are a discrete and insular
minority who have been faced with restrictions and limitations, subjected
to a history of purposeful unequal treatment, and relegated to a position
of political powerlessness in our society, based on characteristics that
are beyond the control of such individuals and resulting from stereotypic
assumptions not truly indicative of the individual ability of such
individuals to participate in, and contribute to, society;

(8) the Nation's proper goals regarding individuals with
disabilities are to assure equality of opportunity, full participation,
independent living, and economic self­sufficiency for such
individuals; and

(9) the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary
discrimination and prejudice denies people with disabilities the
opportunity to compete on an equal basis and to pursue those opportunities
for which our free society is justifiably famous, and costs the United
States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from
dependency and nonproductivity.

(b) Purpose. - It is the purpose of this chapter-

(1) to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the
elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities;

(2) to provide clear, strong, consistent, enforceable standards
addressing discrimination against individuals with disabilities;

(3) to ensure that the Federal Government plays a central role in
enforcing the standards established in this chapter on behalf of
individuals with disabilities; and

(4) to invoke the sweep of congressional authority, including the
power to enforce the fourteenth amendment and to regulate commerce, in
order to address the major areas of discrimination faced
day­to­day by people with disabilities.

DEFINITIONS

SEC. 12102. [Section 3]

As used in this chapter:

(1) Auxiliary aids and services. - The term ``auxiliary aids and
services'' includes-

(A) qualified interpreters or other effective methods of making
aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing
impairments;

(B) qualified readers, taped texts, or other effective methods of
making visually delivered materials available to individuals with visual
impairments;

(C) acquisition or modification of equipment or devices; and

(D) other similar services and actions.

(2) Disability. - The term ``disability'' means, with respect to an
individual-

(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one
or more of the major life activities of such individual;

(B) a record of such an impairment; or

(C) being regarded as having such an impairment.

(3) State. - The term ``State'' means each of the several States,
the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

SUBCHAPTER I [TITLE I] - EMPLOYMENT
DEFINITIONS

SEC. 12111. [Section 101]

As used in this subchapter:

(1) Commission. - The term ``Commission'' means the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission established by section 2000e-4 of this
title [section 705 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964].

(2) Covered entity. - The term ``covered entity'' means an
employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint
labor­management committee.

(3) Direct threat. - The term ``direct threat'' means a significant
risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by
reasonable accommodation.

(4) Employee. - The term ``employee'' means an individual employed
by an employer. With respect to employment in a foreign country, such
term includes an individual who is a citizen of the United States.

(5) Employer. -

(A) In general. - The term ``employer'' means a person engaged in
an industry affecting commerce who has 15 or more employees for each
working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or
preceding calendar year, and any agent of such person, except that, for
two years following the effective date of this subchapter, an employer
means a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has 25 or
more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks
in the current or preceding year, and any agent of such person.

(B) Exceptions. - The term ``employer'' does not include-

(i) the United States, a corporation wholly owned by the government
of the United States, or an Indian tribe; or

(ii) a bona fide private membership club (other than a labor
organization) that is exempt from taxation under section 501(c) of Title
26 [the Internal Revenue Code of 1986].

(6) Illegal use of drugs. -

(A) In general. - The term ``illegal use of drugs'' means the use
of drugs, the possession or distribution of which is unlawful under the
Controlled Substances Act [21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.]. Such term does not
include the use of a drug taken under supervision by a licensed health
care professional, or other uses authorized by the Controlled Substances
Act or other provisions of Federal law.

(B) Drugs. - The term ``drug'' means a controlled substance, as
defined in schedules I through V of section 202 of the Controlled
Substances Act [21 U.S.C. 812].

(7) Person, etc. - The terms ``person'', ``labor organization'',
``employment agency'', ``commerce'', and ``industry affecting commerce'',
shall have the same meaning given such terms in section 2000e of this
title [section 701 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964].

(8) Qualified individual with a disability. - The term ``qualified
individual with a disability'' means an individual with a disability who,
with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential
functions of the employment position that such individual holds or
desires. For the purposes of this subchapter, consideration shall be given
to the employer's judgment as to what functions of a job are essential,
and if an employer has prepared a written description before advertising
or interviewing applicants for the job, this description shall be
considered evidence of the essential functions of the job.

(9) Reasonable accommodation. - The term ``reasonable
accommodation'' may include-

(A) making existing facilities used by employees readily accessible
to and usable by individuals with disabilities; and

(B) job restructuring, part­time or modified work schedules,
reassignment to a vacant position, acquisition or modification of
equipment or devices, appropriate adjustment or modifications of
examinations, training materials or policies, the provision of qualified
readers or interpreters, and other similar accommodations for individuals
with disabilities.

(10) Undue hardship. -

(A) In general. - The term ``undue hardship'' means an action
requiring significant difficulty or expense, when considered in light of
the factors set forth in subparagraph (B).

(B) Factors to be considered. - In determining whether an
accommodation would impose an undue hardship on a covered entity, factors
to be considered include-

(i) the nature and cost of the accommodation needed under this
chapter;

(ii) the overall financial resources of the facility or facilities
involved in the provision of the reasonable accommodation; the number of
persons employed at such facility; the effect on expenses and resources,
or the impact otherwise of such accommodation upon the operation of the
facility;

(iii) the overall financial resources of the covered entity; the
overall size of the business of a covered entity with respect to the
number of its employees; the number, type, and location of its facilities;
and

(iv) the type of operation or operations of the covered entity,
including the composition, structure, and functions of the workforce of
such entity; the geographic separateness, administrative, or fiscal
relationship of the facility or facilities in question to the covered
entity.

DISCRIMINATION

SEC. 12112. [Section 102]

(a) General rule. - No covered entity shall discriminate against a
qualified individual with a disability because of the disability of such
individual in regard to job application procedures, the hiring,
advancement, or discharge of employees, employee compensation, job
training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.

(b) Construction. - As used in subsection (a) of this section, the term
``discriminate'' includes-

(1) limiting, segregating, or classifying a job applicant or
employee in a way that adversely affects the opportunities or status of
such applicant or employee because of the disability of such applicant or
employee;

(2) participating in a contractual or other arrangement or
relationship that has the effect of subjecting a covered entity's
qualified applicant or employee with a disability to the discrimination
prohibited by this subchapter (such relationship includes a relationship
with an employment or referral agency, labor union, an organization
providing fringe benefits to an employee of the covered entity, or an
organization providing training and apprenticeship programs);

(3) utilizing standards, criteria, or methods of administration-

(A) that have the effect of discrimination on the basis of
disability; or

(B) that perpetuate the discrimination of others who are subject to
common administrative control;

(4) excluding or otherwise denying equal jobs or benefits to a
qualified individual because of the known disability of an individual with
whom the qualified individual is known to have a relationship or
association;

(5) (A) not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical
or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a
disability who is an applicant or employee, unless such covered entity can
demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the
operation of the business of such covered entity; or

(B) denying employment opportunities to a job applicant or employee
who is an otherwise qualified individual with a disability, if such denial
is based on the need of such covered entity to make reasonable
accommodation to the physical or mental impairments of the employee or
applicant;

(6) using qualification standards, employment tests or other
selection criteria that screen out or tend to screen out an individual
with a disability or a class of individuals with disabilities unless the
standard, test or other selection criteria, as used by the covered entity,
is shown to be job­related for the position in question and is
consistent with business necessity; and

(7) failing to select and administer tests concerning employment in
the most effective manner to ensure that, when such test is administered
to a job applicant or employee who has a disability that impairs sensory,
manual, or speaking skills, such test results accurately reflect the
skills, aptitude, or whatever other factor of such applicant or employee
that such test purports to measure, rather than reflecting the impaired
sensory, manual, or speaking skills of such employee or applicant (except
where such skills are the factors that the test purports to measure).

(c) Covered entities in foreign countries. -

(1) In general. - It shall not be unlawful under this section for a
covered entity to take any action that constitutes discrimination under
this section with respect to an employee in a workplace in a foreign
country if compliance with this section would cause such covered entity to
violate the law of the foreign country in which such workplace is located.

(2) Control of corporation

(A) Presumption. - If an employer controls a corporation whose
place of incorporation is a foreign country, any practice that constitutes
discrimination under this section and is engaged in by such corporation
shall be presumed to be engaged in by such employer.

(B) Exception. - This section shall not apply with respect to the
foreign operations of an employer that is a foreign person not controlled
by an American employer.

(C) Determination. - For purposes of this paragraph, the
determination of whether an employer controls a corporation shall be based
on-

(i) the interrelation of operations;

(ii) the common management;

(iii) the centralized control of labor relations; and

(iv) the common ownership or financial control, of the employer and
the corporation.

(d) Medical examinations and inquiries. -

(1) In general. - The prohibition against discrimination as
referred to in subsection (a) of this section shall include medical
examinations and inquiries.

(2) Preemployment. -

(A) Prohibited examination or inquiry. - Except as provided in
paragraph (3), a covered entity shall not conduct a medical examination or
make inquiries of a job applicant as to whether such applicant is an
individual with a disability or as to the nature or severity of such
disability.

(B) Acceptable inquiry. - A covered entity may make preemployment
inquiries into the ability of an applicant to perform job­related
functions.

(3) Employment entrance examination. - A covered entity may require
a medical examination after an offer of employment has been made to a job
applicant and prior to the commencement of the employment duties of such
applicant, and may condition an offer of employment on the results of such
examination, if-

(A) all entering employees are subjected to such an examination
regardless of disability;

(B) information obtained regarding the medical condition or history
of the applicant is collected and maintained on separate forms and in
separate medical files and is treated as a confidential medical record,
except that_

(i) supervisors and managers may be informed regarding necessary
restrictions on the work or duties of the employee and necessary
accommodations;

(ii) first aid and safety personnel may be informed, when
appropriate, if the disability might require emergency treatment; and

(iii) government officials investigating compliance with this
chapter shall be provided relevant information on request; and

(C) the results of such examination are used only in accordance
with this subchapter.

(4) Examination and inquiry. -

(A) Prohibited examinations and inquiries. - A covered entity shall
not require a medical examination and shall not make inquiries of an
employee as to whether such employee is an individual with a disability or
as to the nature or severity of the disability, unless such examination or
inquiry is shown to be job­related and consistent with business
necessity.

(B) Acceptable examinations and inquiries. - A covered entity may
conduct voluntary medical examinations, including voluntary medical
histories, which are part of an employee health program available to
employees at that work site. A covered entity may make inquiries into the
ability of an employee to perform job­related functions.

(C) Requirement. - Information obtained under subparagraph (B)
regarding the medical condition or history of any employee are subject to
the requirements of subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (3).

DEFENSES

SEC. 12113. [Section 103]

(a) In general. - It may be a defense to a charge of discrimination
under this chapter that an alleged application of qualification standards,
tests, or selection criteria that screen out or tend to screen out or
otherwise deny a job or benefit to an individual with a disability has
been shown to be job­related and consistent with business necessity,
and such performance cannot be accomplished by reasonable accommodation,
as required under this subchapter.

(b) Qualification standards. - The term ``qualification standards'' may
include a requirement that an individual shall not pose a direct threat to
the health or safety of other individuals in the workplace.

(c) Religious entities. -

(1) In general. - This subchapter shall not prohibit a religious
corporation, association, educational institution, or society from giving
preference in employment to individuals of a particular religion to
perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation,
association, educational institution, or society of its activities.

(2) Religious tenets requirement. - Under this subchapter, a
religious organization may require that all applicants and employees
conform to the religious tenets of such organization.

(d) List of infectious and communicable diseases. -

(1) In general. - The Secretary of Health and Human Services, not
later than 6 months after July 26, 1990 [the date of enactment of this
Act], shall-

(A) review all infectious and communicable diseases which may be
transmitted through handling the food supply;

(B) publish a list of infectious and communicable diseases which
are transmitted through handling the food supply;

(C) publish the methods by which such diseases are transmitted; and

(D) widely disseminate such information regarding the list of
diseases and their modes of transmissibility to the general public.Such
list shall be updated annually.

(2) Applications. - In any case in which an individual has an
infectious or communicable disease that is transmitted to others through
the handling of food, that is included on the list developed by the
Secretary of Health and Human Services under paragraph (1), and which
cannot be eliminated by reasonable accommodation, a covered entity may
refuse to assign or continue to assign such individual to a job involving
food handling.

(3) Construction. - Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to
preempt, modify, or amend any State, county, or local law, ordinance, or
regulation applicable to food handling which is designed to protect the
public health from individuals who pose a significant risk to the health
or safety of others, which cannot be eliminated by reasonable
accommodation, pursuant to the list of infectious or communicable diseases
and the modes of transmissibility published by the Secretary of Health and
Human Services.

ILLEGAL USE OF DRUGS AND ALCOHOL

SEC. 12114. [Section 104]

(a) Qualified individual with a disability. - For purposes of this
subchapter, the term ``qualified individual with a disability'' shall not
include any employee or applicant who is currently engaging in the illegal
use of drugs, when the covered entity acts on the basis of such use.

(b) Rules of construction. - Nothing in subsection (a) of this section
shall be construed to exclude as a qualified individual with a disability
an individual who-

(1) has successfully completed a supervised drug rehabilitation
program and is no longer engaging in the illegal use of drugs, or has
otherwise been rehabilitated successfully and is no longer engaging in
such use;

(2) is participating in a supervised rehabilitation program and is
no longer engaging in such use; or

(3) is erroneously regarded as engaging in such use, but is not
engaging in such use;except that it shall not be a violation of this
chapter for a covered entity to adopt or administer reasonable policies or
procedures, including but not limited to drug testing, designed to ensure
that an individual described in paragraph (1) or (2) is no longer engaging
in the illegal use of drugs.

(c) Authority of covered entity. -

A covered entity-

(1) may prohibit the illegal use of drugs and the use of alcohol at
the workplace by all employees;

(2) may require that employees shall not be under the influence of
alcohol or be engaging in the illegal use of drugs at the workplace;

(3) may require that employees behave in conformance with the
requirements established under the Drug­Free Workplace Act of 1988
(41 U.S.C. 701 et seq.);

(4) may hold an employee who engages in the illegal use of drugs or
who is an alcoholic to the same qualification standards for employment or
job performance and behavior that such entity holds other employees, even
if any unsatisfactory performance or behavior is related to the drug use
or alcoholism of such employee; and

(5) may, with respect to Federal regulations regarding alcohol and
the illegal use of drugs, require that-

(A) employees comply with the standards established in such
regulations of the Department of Defense, if the employees of the covered
entity are employed in an industry subject to such regulations, including
complying with regulations (if any) that apply to employment in sensitive
positions in such an industry, in the case of employees of the covered
entity who are employed in such positions (as defined in the regulations
of the Department of Defense);

(B) employees comply with the standards established in such
regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, if the employees of the
covered entity are employed in an industry subject to such regulations,
including complying with regulations (if any) that apply to employment in
sensitive positions in such an industry, in the case of employees of the
covered entity who are employed in such positions (as defined in the
regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission); and

(C) employees comply with the standards established in such
regulations of the Department of Transportation, if the employees of the
covered entity are employed in a transportation industry subject to such
regulations, including complying with such regulations (if any) that apply
to employment in sensitive positions in such an industry, in the case of
employees of the covered entity who are employed in such positions (as
defined in the regulations of the Department of Transportation).

(d) Drug testing. -

(1) In general. - For purposes of this subchapter, a test to
determine the illegal use of drugs shall not be considered a medical
examination.

(2) Construction. - Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed
to encourage, prohibit, or authorize the conducting of drug testing for
the illegal use of drugs by job applicants or employees or making
employment decisions based on such test results.

(e) Transportation employees. - Nothing in this subchapter shall be
construed to encourage, prohibit, restrict, or authorize the otherwise
lawful exercise by entities subject to the jurisdiction of the Department
of Transportation of authority to-

(1) test employees of such entities in, and applicants for,
positions involving safety­sensitive duties for the illegal use of
drugs and for on­duty impairment by alcohol; and

(2) remove such persons who test positive for illegal use of drugs
and on­duty impairment by alcohol pursuant to paragraph (1) from
safety­sensitive duties in implementing subsection (c) of this
section.

POSTING NOTICES

SEC. 12115. [Section 105]

Every employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint
labor­management committee covered under this subchapter shall post
notices in an accessible format to applicants, employees, and members
describing the applicable provisions of this chapter, in the manner
prescribed by section 2000e-10 of this title [section 711 of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964].

REGULATIONS

SEC. 12116. [Section 106]

Not later than 1 year after July 26, 1990 [the date of enactment of
this Act], the Commission shall issue regulations in an accessible
format to carry out this subchapter in accordance with subchapter II of
chapter 5 of title 5 [United States Code].

ENFORCEMENT

SEC. 12117. [Section 107]

(a) Powers, remedies, and procedures. - The powers, remedies, and
procedures set forth in sections 2000e-4, 2000e-5, 2000e-6, 2000e-8, and
2000e-9 of this title [sections 705, 706, 707, 709 and 710 of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964] shall be the powers, remedies, and procedures this
subchapter provides to the Commission, to the Attorney General, or to any
person alleging discrimination on the basis of disability in violation of
any provision of this chapter, or regulations promulgated under section
12116 of this title [section 106], concerning employment.

(b) Coordination. - The agencies with enforcement authority for actions
which allege employment discrimination under this subchapter and under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 [29 U.S.C. 701 et seq.] shall develop
procedures to ensure that administrative complaints filed under this
subchapter and under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 are dealt with in a
manner that avoids duplication of effort and prevents imposition of
inconsistent or conflicting standards for the same requirements under this
subchapter and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The Commission, the
Attorney General, and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs
shall establish such coordinating mechanisms (similar to provisions
contained in the joint regulations promulgated by the Commission and the
Attorney General at part 42 of title 28 and part 1691 of title 29, Code of
Federal Regulations, and the Memorandum of Understanding between the
Commission and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs dated
January 16, 1981 (46 Fed. Reg. 7435, January 23, 1981)) in regulations
implementing this subchapter and Rehabilitation Act of 1973 not later than
18 months after July 26, 1990 [the date of enactment of this Act].

SUBCHAPTER IV [TITLE V] - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
CONSTRUCTION

SEC. 12201. [Section 501]

(a) In general. - Except as otherwise provided in this chapter,
nothing in this chapter shall be construed to apply a lesser standard than
the standards applied under title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29
U.S.C. 790 et seq.) or the regulations issued by Federal agencies pursuant
to such title.

(b) Relationship to other laws. - Nothing in this chapter shall be
construed to invalidate or limit the remedies, rights, and procedures of
any Federal law or law of any State or political subdivision of any State
or jurisdiction that provides greater or equal protection for the rights
of individuals with disabilities than are afforded by this chapter.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to preclude the prohibition of,
or the imposition of restrictions on, smoking in places of employment
covered by subchapter I of this chapter [title I], in
transportation covered by subchapter II or III of this chapter [title
II or III], or in places of public accommodation covered by subchapter
III of this chapter [title III].

(c) Insurance. - Subchapters I through III of this chapter [titles I
through III] and title IV of this Act shall not be construed to
prohibit or restrict-

(1) an insurer, hospital or medical service company, health
maintenance organization, or any agent, or entity that administers benefit
plans, or similar organizations from underwriting risks, classifying
risks, or administering such risks that are based on or not inconsistent
with State law; or

(2) a person or organization covered by this chapter from
establishing, sponsoring, observing or administering the terms of a bona
fide benefit plan that are based on underwriting risks, classifying risks,
or administering such risks that are based on or not inconsistent with
State law; or

(3) a person or organization covered by this chapter from
establishing, sponsoring, observing or administering the terms of a bona
fide benefit plan that is not subject to State laws that regulate
insurance.

Paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) shall not be used as a subterfuge to evade
the purposes of subchapter I and III of this chapter [titles I and
III].

(d) Accommodations and services. - Nothing in this chapter shall be
construed to require an individual with a disability to accept an
accommodation, aid, service, opportunity, or benefit which such individual
chooses not to accept.

STATE IMMUNITY

SEC. 12202. [Section 502]

A State shall not be immune under the eleventh amendment to the
Constitution of the United States from an action in Federal or State court
of competent jurisdiction for a violation of this chapter. In any action
against a State for a violation of the requirements of this chapter,
remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for
such a violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for
such a violation in an action against any public or private entity other
than a State.

PROHIBITION AGAINST RETALIATION AND COERCION

SEC. 12203. [Section 503]

(a) Retaliation. - No person shall discriminate against any individual
because such individual has opposed any act or practice made unlawful by
this chapter or because such individual made a charge, testified,
assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding,
or hearing under this chapter.

(b) Interference, coercion, or intimidation. - It shall be unlawful to
coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any individual in the
exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his or her having exercised or
enjoyed, or on account of his or her having aided or encouraged any other
individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected
by this chapter.

(c) Remedies and procedures. - The remedies and procedures available under
sections 12117, 12133, and 12188 of this title [sections 107, 203 and
308] shall be available to aggrieved persons for violations of
subsections (a) and (b) of this section, with respect to subchapter I,
subchapter II and subchapter III, respectively, of this chapter [title
I, title II and title III, respectively].

REGULATIONS BY THE ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS
COMPLIANCE BOARD

SEC. 12204. [Section 504]

(a) Issuance of guidelines. - Not later than 9 months after July 26,
1990 [the date of enactment of this Act], the Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board shall issue minimum guidelines
that shall supplement the existing Minimum Guidelines and Requirements for
Accessible Design for purposes of subchapters II and III of this chapter
[titles II and III].

(b) Contents of guidelines. - The supplemental guidelines issued under
subsection (a) of this section shall establish additional requirements,
consistent with this chapter, to ensure that buildings, facilities, rail
passenger cars, and vehicles are accessible, in terms of architecture and
design, transportation, and communication, to individuals with
disabilities.

(c) Qualified historic properties. -

(1) In general. - The supplemental guidelines issued under
subsection (a) of this section shall include procedures and requirements
for alterations that will threaten or destroy the historic significance of
qualified historic buildings and facilities as defined in 4.1.7(1)(a) of
the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards.

(2) Sites eligible for listing in National Register. - With respect
to alterations of buildings or facilities that are eligible for listing in
the National Register of Historic Places under the National Historic
Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), the guidelines described in
paragraph (1) shall, at a minimum, maintain the procedures and
requirements established in 4.1.7(1) and (2) of the Uniform Federal
Accessibility Standards.

(3) Other sites. - With respect to alterations of buildings or
facilities designated as historic under State or local law, the guidelines
described in paragraph (1) shall establish procedures equivalent to those
established by 4.1.7(1)(b) and (c) of the Uniform Federal Accessibility
Standards, and shall require, at a minimum, compliance with the
requirements established in 4.1.7(2) of such standards.

ATTORNEY'S FEES

SEC. 12205. [Section 505]

In any action or administrative proceeding commenced pursuant to this
chapter, the court or agency, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing
party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee,
including litigation expenses, and costs, and the United States shall be
liable for the foregoing the same as a private individual.

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

SEC. 12206. [Section 506]

(a) Plan for assistance. -

(1) In general. - Not later than 180 days after July 26, 1990
[the date of enactment of this Act], the Attorney General, in
consultation with the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, the Secretary of Transportation, the Chair of the
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, and the
Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, shall develop a plan to
assist entities covered under this chapter, and other Federal agencies, in
understanding the responsibility of such entities and agencies under this
chapter.

(2) Publication of plan. - The Attorney General shall publish the
plan referred to in paragraph (1) for public comment in accordance with
subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5 [United States Code]
(commonly known as the Administrative Procedure Act).

(b) Agency and public assistance. - The Attorney General may obtain the
assistance of other Federal agencies in carrying out subsection (a) of
this section, including the National Council on Disability, the
President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities, the Small
Business Administration, and the Department of Commerce.

(c) Implementation. -

(1) Rendering assistance. - Each Federal agency that has
responsibility under paragraph (2) for implementing this chapter may
render technical assistance to individuals and institutions that have
rights or duties under the respective subchapter or subchapters of this
chapter for which such agency has responsibility.

(2) Implementation of subchapters. -

(A) Subchapter I [Title I]. - The Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission and the Attorney General shall implement the plan
for assistance developed under subsection (a) of this section, for
subchapter I of this chapter [title I].

(B) Subchapter II [Title II]. -

(i) Part A [Subtitle A]. - The Attorney General shall
implement such plan for assistance for part A of subchapter II of this
chapter [subtitle A of title II].

(ii) Part B [Subtitle B]. - The Secretary of Transportation
shall implement such plan for assistance for part B of subchapter II of
this chapter [subtitle B of title II].

(C) Subchapter III [Title III]. - The Attorney General, in
coordination with the Secretary of Transportation and the Chair of the
Architectural Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, shall implement
such plan for assistance for subchapter III of this chapter, except for
section 12184 of this title [section 304], the plan for assistance
for which shall be implemented by the Secretary of Transportation.

(D) Title IV. - The Chairman of the Federal Communications
Commission, in coordination with the Attorney General, shall implement
such plan for assistance for title IV.

(3) Technical assistance manuals. - Each Federal agency that has
responsibility under paragraph (2) for implementing this chapter shall, as
part of its implementation responsibilities, ensure the availability and
provision of appropriate technical assistance manuals to individuals or
entities with rights or duties under this chapter no later than six months
after applicable final regulations are published under subchapters I, II,
and III of this chapter [titles I, II, and III] and title IV.

(d) Grants and contracts. -

(1) In general. - Each Federal agency that has responsibility under
subsection (c)(2) of this section for implementing this chapter may make
grants or award contracts to effectuate the purposes of this section,
subject to the availability of appropriations. Such grants and contracts
may be awarded to individuals, institutions not organized for profit and
no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private
shareholder or individual (including educational institutions), and
associations representing individuals who have rights or duties under this
chapter. Contracts may be awarded to entities organized for profit, but
such entities may not be the recipients or grants described in this
paragraph.

(2) Dissemination of information. - Such grants and contracts,
among other uses, may be designed to ensure wide dissemination of
information about the rights and duties established by this chapter and to
provide information and technical assistance about techniques for
effective compliance with this chapter.

(e) Failure to receive assistance. - An employer, public accommodation, or
other entity covered under this chapter shall not be excused from
compliance with the requirements of this chapter because of any failure to
receive technical assistance under this section, including any failure in
the development or dissemination of any technical assistance manual
authorized by this section.

FEDERAL WILDERNESS AREAS

SEC. 12207. [Section 507]

(a) Study. - The National Council on Disability shall conduct a study
and report on the effect that wilderness designations and wilderness land
management practices have on the ability of individuals with disabilities
to use and enjoy the National Wilderness Preservation System as
established under the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.).

(b) Submission of report. - Not later than 1 year after July 26, 1990
[the date of enactment of this Act], the National Council on
Disability shall submit the report required under subsection (a) of this
section to Congress.

(c) Specific wilderness access. -

(1) In general. - Congress reaffirms that nothing in the Wilderness
Act [16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.] is to be construed as prohibiting the use of
a wheelchair in a wilderness area by an individual whose disability
requires use of a wheelchair, and consistent with the Wilderness Act no
agency is required to provide any form of special treatment or
accommodation, or to construct any facilities or modify any conditions of
lands within a wilderness area in order to facilitate such use.

(2) Definition. - For purposes of paragraph (1), the term
``wheelchair'' means a device designed solely for use by a
mobility­impaired person for locomotion, that is suitable for use in
an indoor pedestrian area.

TRANSVESTITES

SEC. 12208. [Section 508]

For the purposes of this chapter, the term ``disabled'' or
``disability'' shall not apply to an individual solely because that
individual is a transvestite.

COVERAGE OF CONGRESS AND THE AGENCIES OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

SEC. 12209. [Section 509]

(a) Coverage of the Senate. -

(1) Commitment to Rule XLII. - The Senate reaffirms its commitment
to Rule XLII of the Standing Rules of the Senate which provides as
follows:

``No member, officer, or employee of the Senate shall, with
respect to employment by the Senate or any office thereof-

``(a) fail or refuse to hire an individual;

``(b) discharge an individual; or

``(c) otherwise discriminate against an individual with respect to
promotion, compensation, or terms, conditions, or privileges of
employment on the basis of such individual's race, color,
religion, sex, national origin, age, or state of physical
handicap.''

(2) Matters other than employment. -

(A) In general. - The rights and protections under this chapter
shall, subject to subparagraph (B), apply with respect to the conduct of
the Senate regarding matters other than employment.

(B) Remedies. - The Architect of the Capitol shall establish
remedies and procedures to be utilized with respect to the rights and
protections provided pursuant to subparagraph (A). Such remedies and
procedures shall apply exclusively, after approval in accordance with
subparagraph (C).

(C) Proposed remedies and procedures. - For purposes of
subparagraph (B), the Architect of the Capitol shall submit proposed
remedies and procedures to the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration. The remedies and procedures shall be effective upon the
approval of the Committee on Rules and Administration.

(3) Exercise of rulemaking power. - Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, enforcement and adjudication of the rights and
protections referred to in paragraph (2)(A) shall be within the
exclusive jurisdiction of the United States Senate. The provisions of
paragraph (1), (2) are enacted by the Senate as an exercise of the
rulemaking power of the Senate, with full recognition of the right of the
Senate to change its rules, in the same manner, and to the same extent, as
in the case of any other rule of the Senate.

(b) Coverage of the House of Representatives. -

(1) In general. - Notwithstanding any other provision of this
chapter or of law, the purposes of this chapter shall, subject to
paragraphs (2) and (3), apply in their entirety to the House of
Representatives.

(2) Employment in the House. -

(A) Application. - The rights and protections under this chapter
shall, subject to subparagraph (B), apply with respect to any employee in
an employment position in the House of Representatives and any employing
authority of the House of Representatives.

(B) Administration. -

(i) In general. - In the administration of this paragraph, the
remedies and procedures made applicable pursuant to the resolution
described in clause (ii) shall apply exclusively.

(ii) Resolution. - The resolution referred to in clause (i) is
House Resolution 15 of the One Hundred First Congress, as agreed to
January 3, 1989, or any other provision that continues in effect the
provisions of, or is a successor to, the Fair Employment Practices
Resolution (House Resolution 558 of the One Hundredth Congress, as agreed
to October 4, 1988).

(C) Exercise of rulemaking power. - The provisions of subparagraph
(B) are enacted by the House of Representatives as an exercise of the
rulemaking power of the House of Representatives, with full recognition of
the right of the House to change its rules, in the same manner, and to the
same extent as in the case of any other rule of the House.

(3) Matters other than employment. -

(A) In general. - The rights and protections under this chapter
shall, subject to subparagraph (B), apply with respect to the conduct of
the House of Representatives regarding matters other than employment.

(B) Remedies. - The Architect of the Capitol shall establish
remedies and procedures to be utilized with respect to the rights and
protections provided pursuant to subparagraph (A). Such remedies and
procedures shall apply exclusively, after approval in accordance with
subparagraph (C).

(C) Approval. - For purposes of subparagraph (B), the Architect of
the Capitol shall submit proposed remedies and procedures to the Speaker
of the House of Representatives. The remedies and procedures shall be
effective upon the approval of the Speaker, after consultation with the
House Office Building Commission.

(c) Instrumentalities of Congress. -

(1) In general. - The rights and protections under this chapter
shall, subject to paragraph (2), apply with respect to the conduct of each
instrumentality of the Congress.

(2) Establishment of remedies and procedures by instrumentalities.
- The chief official of each instrumentality of the Congress shall
establish remedies and procedures to be utilized with respect to the
rights and protections provided pursuant to paragraph (1). Such remedies
and procedures shall apply exclusively, except for the employees who
are defined as Senate employees, in section 201(c)(1) of the Civil Rights
Act of 1991.

(3) Report to Congress. - The chief official of each instrumentality
of the Congress shall, after establishing remedies and procedures for
purposes of paragraph (2), submit to the Congress a report describing the
remedies and procedures.

(4) Definition of instrumentalities. - For purposes of this
section, instrumentalities of the Congress include the following: the
Architect of the Capitol, the Congressional Budget Office, the General
Accounting Office, the Government Printing Office, the Library of
Congress, the Office of Technology Assessment, and the United States
Botanic Garden.

(5) Construction. - Nothing in this section shall alter the
enforcement procedures for individuals with disabilities provided in the
General Accounting Office Personnel Act of 1980 [31 U.S.C. 731 et
seq.] and regulations promulgated pursuant to that Act.

ILLEGAL USE OF DRUGS

SEC. 12210. [Section 510]

(a) In general. - For purposes of this chapter, the term ``individual
with a disability'' does not include an individual who is currently
engaging in the illegal use of drugs, when the covered entity acts on the
basis of such use.

(b) Rules of construction. - Nothing in subsection (a) of this section
shall be construed to exclude as an individual with a disability an
individual who-

(1) has successfully completed a supervised drug rehabilitation
program and is no longer engaging in the illegal use of drugs, or has
otherwise been rehabilitated successfully and is no longer engaging in
such use;

(2) is participating in a supervised rehabilitation program and is
no longer engaging in such use; or

(3) is erroneously regarded as engaging in such use, but is not
engaging in such use; except that it shall not be a violation of this
chapter for a covered entity to adopt or administer reasonable policies or
procedures, including but not limited to drug testing, designed to ensure
that an individual described in paragraph (1) or (2) is no longer engaging
in the illegal use of drugs; however, nothing in this section shall be
construed to encourage, prohibit, restrict, or authorize the conducting of
testing for the illegal use of drugs.

(c) Health and other services. - Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this
section and section 12211(b)(3) of this title [section 511(b)(3)],
an individual shall not be denied health services, or services provided in
connection with drug rehabilitation, on the basis of the current illegal
use of drugs if the individual is otherwise entitled to such services.

(d) Definition of illegal use of drugs. -

(1) In general. - The term ``illegal use of drugs'' means the use
of drugs, the possession or distribution of which is unlawful under the
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812). Such term does not include the
use of a drug taken under supervision by a licensed health care
professional, or other uses authorized by the Controlled Substances Act or
other provisions of Federal law.

(2) Drugs

The term ``drug'' means a controlled substance, as defined in schedules I
through V of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act [21 U.S.C.
812].

DEFINITIONS

SEC. 12211. [Section 511]

(a) Homosexuality and bisexuality. - For purposes of the definition of
``disability'' in section 12102(2) of this title [section 3(2)],
homosexuality and bisexuality are not impairments and as such are not
disabilities under this chapter.

(b) Certain conditions. - Under this chapter, the term ``disability''
shall not include-

(1) transvestism, transsexualism, pedophilia, exhibitionism,
voyeurism, gender identity disorders not resulting from physical
impairments, or other sexual behavior disorders;

(2) compulsive gambling, kleptomania, or pyromania; or

(3) psychoactive substance use disorders resulting from current
illegal use of drugs.

AMENDMENTS TO THE REHABILITATION ACT

[Section 512 of Title V of the ADA (42 U.S.C. 12115) amended two
subsections of section 7 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C.
706(8)). These amendments are printed elsewhere in this publication.]

ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION

SEC. 12212. [Section 513]

Where appropriate and to the extent authorized by law, the use of
alternative means of dispute resolution, including settlement
negotiations, conciliation, facilitation, mediation, factfinding,
minitrials, and arbitration, is encouraged to resolve disputes arising
under this chapter.

SEVERABILITY

SEC. 12213. [Section 514]

Should any provision in this chapter be found to be unconstitutional
by a court of law, such provision shall be severed from the remainder of
the chapter, and such action shall not affect the enforceability of the
remaining provisions of the chapter.

[Approved July 26, 1990]

BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
thanks Gloria, for cutting and pasting from the USC.

However, you will notice a couple things: One, the ADA has subsections that spell out where it applies. THose subsections are: EMPLOYMENT, TELECOMMUNICATIONS, PUBLIC ACCOMODATIONS, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, and GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES AND SERVICES. You copied only one part, that pertaining to EMPLOYMENT.

If an HOA is employing more than 15 employees, then yes, it is covered. However, if an HOA is employing only 1 employee, or NO employees,then the employment section doesn't cover it. See the section on "covered entity" under the employment section: 2) Covered entity. - The term ``covered entity'' means an employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor­management committee.

That section tells you EXACTLY who the section applies to. Also, right under there, tha ADA itself tells you who it DOESN'T apply to: (B) Exceptions. - The term ``employer'' does not include-

(i) the United States, a corporation wholly owned by the government
of the United States, or an Indian tribe; or
(ii) a bona fide private membership club (other than a labor
organization) that is exempt from taxation under section 501(c) of Title
26 [the Internal Revenue Code of 1986].

Thus, Indian tribes Living in the US are exempt from THIS SECTION of the ADA. Private Clubs are exempt from the sections on Public Accomodations, Most HOA's are not government agencies, and thus exempt from those standard, Some religious organizations are exempt from the standards (The ADA provides that its provisions “shall not apply ... to religious organizations or entities controlled by religious organizations, including places of worship.” 42 U.S.C. § 12187.), etc.. there are a LOT of exemptions to each portion of the ADA, and then, of course, there is the big exemption to ALL of the ADA. If you are a diplomat, or a member of the Executive Branch of the US Government, you are automatically exempt from the ADA standards. Since last i checked, all of these exemptions (Indian tribe, religous groups, private clubs, and everyone who is not a government agency, running a public accomodation, hiring, providing telecommunications or running a bus/cab service) live in the US, as well as thousands of diplomats and most members of the President's executive staff, my check is safe.

BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
And, if you enjoy reading, may i suggest the US Government's own FAQ on the ADA: http://www.ada.gov/q%26aeng02.htm

Inside that, there are these fascinating tidbits, cut/pasted/edited for brevity directly from the US Government pamphlet on the ADA found at www.ada.gov :

Q. What employers are covered by title I of the ADA, and when is the coverage effective?

A. The title I employment provisions apply to private employers, State and local governments, employment agencies, and labor unions. Employers with 25 or more employees were covered as of July 26, 1992. Employers with 15 or more employees were covered two years later, beginning July 26, 1994.

(employers with less than 15 employees are not covered..brianb)

Q. What are public accommodations?

A. A public accommodation is a private entity that owns, operates, leases, or leases to, a place of public accommodation. Places of public accommodation include a wide range of entities, such as restaurants, hotels, theaters, doctors' offices, pharmacies, retail stores, museums, libraries, parks, private schools, and day care centers. Private clubs and religious organizations are exempt from the ADA's title III requirements for public accommodations.

(people living in the US who are not covered are spelled out right here... private clubs and religous organizations... brianb)

Q. Is the Federal government covered by the ADA?

A. The ADA does not cover the executive branch of the Federal government.

(thus, lots of people who live in the US not covered)

Q. Does the ADA cover private apartments and private homes?

A. The ADA does not cover strictly residential private apartments and homes.

(Me! I live in a private home, and thus, I am not covered!!!!!)

Q. Does the ADA cover air transportation?

A. Discrimination by air carriers in areas other than employment is not covered by the ADA...

Somehow, when a body of law spells out entire groups of people that it doesn't cover, I find it hard to follow how the claim can be made that it covers all people.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
I vote this win to Brian.

CaroleJ (Georgia)
Posts: 70
Posted:
Brian-

Your bad for quoting Gloria's statement that included the FHA and then demanding proof for such statement. My bad for not getting that you then went on only to talk about the ADA.

However, when discussing persons affected/not affected by the FHA, I was clearly talking about Federal Acts, which as far as I know, cover all US citizens living in the US. State laws and Chinese laws were not covered in my discussion. Therefore, you are still on the hook to refute my argument, federal law wise. :-)

But, as we each have 1 bad, I think we should bring the amount on the table down to $25,000.

BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
lol.. yup, my bad. I didn't clean up her quote, i am a foul victim to the laziness of cut and paste!

However, to keep the arguement alive, I must point out that you are trying to change the rules of the offer. My offer was to prove the statement, made by kirk and gloria, that everyone living in the US was covered by the ADA.

Now, you want to narrow that to "US Citizens" living in the US, as well as try to add your idea of "affected" instead of covered (i happen to like "covered", since the ADA publications themselves use that word). That was not the deal, and since it was my offer, and you have not made any counter offer with your own money, you cannot change the contract at will. I do not accept the terms you are imposing.

If you want to collect my offer, you have to logically prove that the ADA covers every person living in the USA. This would include (but is not limited to) employers with under 15 employees, single family homeowners, the executive branch of the federal government, indian tribes, religous and private organizations, military personnel, the CIA, anyone under executive orders pursuant to the Patriot act, members of the United Nations and diplomats from other countries living here...

(this is why i like "covered"):

Q. What employers are covered by title I of the ADA, and when is the coverage effective?

A. The title I employment provisions apply to private employers, State and local governments, employment agencies, and labor unions. Employers with 25 or more employees were covered as of July 26, 1992. Employers with 15 or more employees were covered two years later, beginning July 26, 1994.

Q. What are public accommodations?

A. A public accommodation is a private entity that owns, operates, leases, or leases to, a place of public accommodation. Places of public accommodation include a wide range of entities, such as restaurants, hotels, theaters, doctors' offices, pharmacies, retail stores, museums, libraries, parks, private schools, and day care centers. Private clubs and religious organizations are exempt from the ADA's title III requirements for public accommodations.

Q. Is the Federal government covered by the ADA?

A. The ADA does not cover the executive branch of the Federal government.

Q. Does the ADA cover private apartments and private homes?

A. The ADA does not cover strictly residential private apartments and homes.

Q. Does the ADA cover air transportation?

A. Discrimination by air carriers in areas other than employment is not covered by the ADA...
GloriaM (North Carolina)
Posts: 829
Posted:
My previous post was not just the subsection of employment of the ADA but the Act in its entirety. I also stated that an attorney could use the ADA along with the Fair Housing Act as in this portion below to represent their client:

The Act uses the term “handicap” instead of the term "disability." Both terms have the same legal meaning. See Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 631 (1998) (noting that definition of “disability” in the Americans with Disabilities Act is drawn almost verbatim “from the definition
of 'handicap' contained in the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988”). This document uses the term "disability," which is more generally accepted.

Therefore if an Owner was to claim disability or handicap in an HOA for whatever reason; like Bill did in his HOA in a previous post and he won in court using the ADA and FHA.

Again not to say that all American's (key word) with a disability has a case and that is up to the courts. But the question was can it be used, yes, is it for all American's, yes!
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
Your efforts to change the context of your statement by now saying "American Citizens" (rather than everyone living in the US) does little to prove your point, because the ADA specifically states a large category of American Citizens that are NOT covered by it (indian tribes, single family home owners, religous organizations, private clubs, executive branch of the federal government, etc.).

I will agree that the Fair Housing Act may apply. no arguement there, that law is so vaguely written and broad of language, it could be used to apply to a owl making a nest in a cactus. I simply try to make it clear that the ADA isn't some huge, blanket set of laws that covers every living person in the US in every situation. THe ADA is VERY Specific to Employment, Public Accomodations, Transportation, Telecommunications, and Government Services/Agencies.

And the reason i said you hadn't copied the entire ADA is becuase I cannot find in your post a large section of the Act: For example, Subchapter II, Public Services, sections 12131 through 12165, nor Subchapter III, Public Accomodations. It looks like your post covers employment, then jumps to subchapter IV. That's why i said it looked incomplete.

The entire text of the ADA can be found here http://www.ada.gov/pubs/ada.htm and it is huge.
KirkW1 (Texas)
Posts: 1,665
Posted:
Brian,

I am sure you will remain smug and never pay the money for lack of "proof." All the same, I am not impressed with your grandstanding. I am thankful that I don't need to worry about you running for BOD in my association.

When you state that the Fair Housing Act and the Americans With Disabilities Act are separate unrelated acts, you prove to me that you don't understand either one. The simple truth is that the title "Americans With Disability Act" (ADA) has come to refer to a slate of laws relating to persons with disability. The same can be said about the "Fair Housing Act." And both of them will encompass some of the same laws. Thus if you bother to research either on the websites setup by our government, you will find them linking back and forth.

The simple fact is that any smug statements stating that the acts don't apply simply show ignorance and high mindedness.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By KirkW1 on 06/10/2008 1:19 PM
Brian,
I am sure you will remain smug and never pay the money for lack of "proof." All the same, I am not impressed with your grandstanding. I am thankful that I don't need to worry about you running for BOD in my association.

When you state that the Fair Housing Act and the Americans With Disabilities Act are separate unrelated acts, you prove to me that you don't understand either one. The simple truth is that the title "Americans With Disability Act" (ADA) has come to refer to a slate of laws relating to persons with disability. The same can be said about the "Fair Housing Act." And both of them will encompass some of the same laws. Thus if you bother to research either on the websites setup by our government, you will find them linking back and forth.

The simple fact is that any smug statements stating that the acts don't apply simply show ignorance and high mindedness.

First, i never said "unrelated acts", do not make false arguements or put words in my mouth. I state they are separate acts. The Fair Housing Act is 42 U.S.C. 3601, and is actually Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The ADA is 42 U.S.C 12101, and was created in 1990, which by my math is 22 years later than the FHA. 22 years and entirely different sections of law are enough in my book to be "separate" acts. THe fact that Congress even titled them separately was a big clue to me that they are indeed, separate acts. Sure, they both cover similar things, but the CLean air act and the clean water act both cover the environment, but they too are separate acts, along with the endangered species act (a third, separate act).

The fact that people use the ADA to mean "anything having to do with disabilities" means nothing in a legal sense. THe truth is, the ADA covers certain situations, and does not cover everything. People can say that a mule is a horse, but that doesn't make it true. All i try to do is remind people to READ the laws, and not believe someone who claims "Well, the law says this". Read the law, it may or may not say "that". In this case, the ADA covers certain things, the FHA covers other things, and people should be very specific when speaking of the law to know which law is which. In legal terms, such things are often what court cases are decided upon. Should a person sue for something "under the ADA" that isn't covered by the ADA, a court can simply throw out the suit because the law is not applicable. The court is not required to tell the plaintiff's "you should have tried this instead".

AS for your "research the websites" statement, that is illogic in the extreme. The fact that a website LINKS to another website is the work of two seconds and a web designer. It implies NOTHING legally. The ADA website also links to the FCC, EEOC, HUD, and the department of agriculture, along with the White House web site, the small business administration, and the parks and recreation department. Are you really saying that any website that links to another website means they are the same?
GlenL (Ohio)
Posts: 5,491
Posted:
Brian is right on this one. We had a group of H/O's demanding that we install handicapped parking because it was required by the ADA. Well we checked and the ADA doesn't apply to our HOA because it is all private property. We did however have to make reasonable accommodations under the FHA.

Studies show that 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions
CaroleJ (Georgia)
Posts: 70
Posted:
Time out for dis-ingenuousness on Brian's part and mine for keeping it going.

Getting back to HOAs, the larger picture is how the courts and the laws have started slowly (very) drifting away from the 'Business Judgment Rule' and into legislation more oriented toward homes and homeowners in property law. The literature on the new communities, the ones that are oriented towards 'relationships over ownership', becomes larger every day. As new laws are passed in Florida, Nevada, California the tilt has been way more towards the homeowners rights vs the Board's rights.

And rightfully so. Right now we are controlled in most states by their non-profit codes for corporations, and Boards have been given so much power that the "stockholders," who in this case can't buy and sell their stock as easily as selling shares of Google, in favor of new shares of Coke, are help captive under rigid regimes, while courts evaluate disputes from the sense of businesses. And that explanation completely overlooks the personal attachments that people form in their communities.

Truthfully, it is somewhat surprising on this forum to hear so little of the future that is already here, even if it's not evenly and fully distributed yet around the states. Mostly, the Questions from the perplexed and the Answers from the Experienced come from the old command and control model.

The reason I say the future is already here so confidently is because the CAI, the Institute most geared towards the Board, has accepted this and in its own way is preaching a big gospel of reform. Realtors are trying to educate Boards, as they see potential sales fleeing towards single-family dwellings in Nowheresville when a Board is found listed under the letter 'T' for Tyranny. But the biggest and largest elephant in the room is by far AARP, and their celebrated Homeowners Bill of Rights. Legislators tend to listen to AARP.

AARP turned traditional community governance and its collective documents into fodder for the shredders when they published the Bill.

Limits on Default and Implied Powers. Governing documents, and statutes governing homeowners, shall be construed to favor homeowners’ free and unrestricted use of their home, and against any person seeking to enforce a limit on homeowner rights. p.30


I know that most Boards are reasonable and most owners are reasonable, also. But it only takes one member on a board to start a war. And it is the Board, not the owners who has the power, law and money all stacked on its side, regardless of who fired the first shot. Few come out of it unscathed.

I say let the future begin now.

The law in this area is an unspeakable quagmire. The intrepid soul who ventures into this formidable wilderness never emerges unscarred. Some, the smarter ones, quickly turn back to take up something easier like the income taxation of trusts and estates. Others, having lost their way, plunge on and after weeks of effort emerge not far from where they began, clearly the worse for wear. On looking back they see the trail they thought they broke obscured with foul smelling waters and noxious weeds. Few willingly take up the challenge again. [Prof. Rabin speaking of a CA Supreme Court HOA decision]
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
amen sister Carole...

KirkW1 (Texas)
Posts: 1,665
Posted:
Brian,

While you are correct in that there was an initial ADA law, at this point it is proper to refer to them as laws. Consider that even the original law brought other related laws under a single umbrella law. Then the original received a significant additional law under the same name about five years later.

But going back to the original post, there is every reason to believe that a condo or HOA board could be risking enforcement action if they do not reasonably accommodate a resident with a disability. The most obvious area is when architectural controls inhibit needed changes for livability (as in a wheelchair ramp). But the laws are written in such a manner that telling a resident they can't leave a cart in thier parking space while they go to the store could in fact trigger enforcement action from the Department of Justice ADA compliance division. And they will not find arguments that the HOA or condo doesn't fall under ADA to be persuasive at all. In fact, such a statement could trigger more aggressive action.

I used to converse some with an investigator with said division and she mentioned that more then one organization has regretted getting smart on pointing out that this or that is not properly considered ADA. In more then one such occasion the result was that an additional federal agency got involved.

Going back to Irene's post,I would recommend that she visit www.ada.gov and feel free to call to DOJ. They may refer her to another agency. But before going that route, I would be sure to exhaust other avenues. I would also make a point to speak to each board member individually to ensure that they understand the situation and answer questions. I know there are bone headed jerks, but most people I have ever come across care about doing right by those who are disabled.
CaroleJ (Georgia)
Posts: 70
Posted:
Brian B -

We can't be on the same side and still place bets against the other. On the other hand, we would probably be a better bandwagon together, for the future. On third thought, we can do both.

How's that for a study in firmness of convictions? I call it flexible. :-)

I'm trying to decide which of the issues in Irene's case is worse; the part where the Board has so much power that it can dramatically decrease (or at least threaten to) someone's quality of life, or the part where the entire incident is so normal that we don't even notice how we have let 'property values' replace our human ones?

Wayne Hyatt, a well known community association attorney with close ties to the CAI, and the author of The Law of Community Associations (Wiley,1991) talks about reforming community associations:

Developers, community managers, and association members are realizing that there is more to life than enforcement and regimentation. This realization is the hallmark of the new communities that are becoming involved in programs and activities that enliven and revitalize not only the common interest community itself but the greater public community. An excessive focus on "pets, parking, children, and trash" is inappropriate in places where people have something more important and valuable to do. [Balancing Community and Governance: Reforming the Community Association p. 14]


GlenL (Ohio)
Posts: 5,491
Posted:
Carol I appreciate your point of revitalizing the rules to make them more homeowner friendly and at the risk of hijacking the thread I couldn't disagree more about AARP's so called Homeowner's Bill of Rights. The power to amend and modify declarations & by-laws has always rested in the hands of the H/O's. Don't like something you agreed to abide by when you bought in, get enough people that think your way and you can vote to change it. Don't like the way the BOD behaves after years of owner apathy? Get the owners together and vote them out.

You brought up pets so I'll touch on them briefly. There are a lot of people who are allergic to animals or afraid of them so they move into a community that expressly prohibits or regulates them. Why should that policy be changed because someone bought into the community who now wants a pet because ("They didn't know before they bought and anyway it's a silly rule.")? I live in a condo community if the BOD didn't regulate pets, which are allowed here, there would be chaos, 132 units allowed two pets each is 264 which is marginally manageable.

But let's face it not everyone is going to have one pet let alone two so why should the BOD want to limit that nice old lady or man with the 20 cats? I mean it only happened once where they got into the walls and died and they mostly hit the litter box so urine only dripped though the ceiling of their downstairs neighbor once. And the lady with the Great Dane on the third floor who was too lazy to walk her dog but would let it "whiz" on her deck; the people eating brunch on the deck below should understand and just get over it.

Most of the so called Homeowner Bill of Right's are designed IMO to simply hamstring an Association and provide relief for deadbeats and malcontents. Are there Associations that mistreat homeowners? Absolutely, just as there are homeowners that mistreat and steal from their fellow homeowners; and just as there are people that stir up trouble just for the entertainment value of it.

Are there some good ideas in the "Bill" yes but I believe the bad far out ways the good here.
As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said "Great cases, like hard cases, make bad law. They appeal to the feelings and distorts the judgment." In this case I think the stories of the wronged tempt legislators to distort the law to fit the case, possibly creating unforeseen dangers for the future.

Studies show that 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions
MikeS1
Posts: 668
Posted:
GlenL - Was this an apt or Condo where you installed Handicapped parking?
GlenL (Ohio)
Posts: 5,491
Posted:
Condo

Studies show that 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
GlenL said: " Most of the so called Homeowner Bill of Right's are designed IMO to simply hamstring an Association and provide relief for deadbeats and malcontents. Are there Associations that mistreat homeowners? Absolutely, just as there are homeowners that mistreat and steal from their fellow homeowners; and just as there are people that stir up trouble just for the entertainment value of it."

**genuflecting to my new god**

(note: it's a lower case "g," so don't get too big a head over it!)

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here