for this denial was that there was not enough money available to hire a lift equipped van which the students required. When the issue became public, it was presented as a charity case and, as expected, two private wheelchair service companies from the community came forward and donated vehicles for use on the day of the trip. I am sad to report that this was not the first time that such an incident occurred in the city and I am also sad to report that it still remains a charity issue that is being addressed by the community rather than the recognition that it was truly the civil rights issue that it was. The second incident involves a woman who called me last week to inquire about getting a waiver from the State building codes so she would not have to make her daycare center accessible. She claimed it was not necessary to provide access to the center because, quote, the State takes care of all of the handicapped children, end quote. And besides a person with a disability could not possibly work in a daycare center because of the need to change diapers and supervise playground activities. Well, first, I patiently explained to her the waiver process. And then I tried to educate her of the importance of integrating children with disabilities with children without disabilities at an early age. I further explained-to no avail, I might add-that if she tried to exclude handicapped children from her center, she might legitimately be charged with discrimination. I also told her of my experience personally diapering and otherwise caring for my daughter and even shared with her my wheelchair sports experience which would certainly assist me in supervising any playground activities. I told her that I thought I would make a good daycare worker and would it not be unfair to deny me employment opportunities her center might offer. She seemed deaf to my words and asked me to again explain the waiver process. The third incident was already reported by Shelly T. Wargo about a half hour ago. And that involves the commuter bus that a city in Connecticut was buying with Federal funds that they refused to include a wheelchair lift on it. And I will not repeat that example. But that was the third instance that I have been involved within the last couple of weeks. Because of these three recent instances as well as all the other instances of discrimination that our office deals with, I plead with you to move the Americans With Disabilities Act forward on the House agenda. It is desperately needed by the 36 million Americans who have disabilities and need the additional protection such an act offers. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. [The prepared statement of Stan Koslowski follows:] Good afternoon. My name is Stan Kosloski and I am the Assistant Director of the Connecticut Office of Protection and Advocacy for Handicapped Persons. i would like to share with you some general information about discrimination based on disability as it occurs in Connecticut, and then three specific incidents that i have been involved with personally in the last two weeks. The Connecticut Office of Protection and Advocacy represented over 2000 people last year who had some form of a disability-related problem. These problems included special education issues; employment discrimination; transportation deficiencies; housing needs, including discrimination; financial entitlement denials; denial of services from state agencies; institutional abuse and neglect; and architectural barriers. I am here to tell you that discrimination based on disability is alive and weil in Connecticut, and i suspect in the rest of the country as well. The people who are experiencing difficulties with discrimination come in ail shapes and sizes. They are rich, they are poor; they are wh.ce, they are black, they are Hispanic; they live in the cities, they live in the suburcs, and they live in the country; they are mentally retarded, they are physically disabled; they are hearing impaired, they are visually impaired; they have psychiatric disabilities, and they have disabilities which are not visible to the casual observer. In all cases prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination are a fact of life, and it is one of the tragedies of cur day that we have not yet found a way to rid ourselves of this terrible phenomonom. I have been involved in three incidents recently which point out the need for stronger civil rights efforts on cehalf of persons with disabilities. The .rst occurred in an urban school system when physically disabled students were being denied the opportunity to participate in a field trip with their able-bodied peers. The reason for this denial was that there was not enough money available to hire a lift-equipped van that the students required. When the issue became public it was presented as a charity case, and, as expected, two wheelchair service companies from the community came forward and conated venicies for use on the day of the trip. i am sad to report that this wasnt the first time such an incident occurred in this particular school system. And the civil rights aspect of this issue has yet to be uncerstood as a legitimate claim. Phone: 566-7616, 1-800-842-7303, 566-2102 (TDD) The second incident also involves transportation. The transi: district of a second urban area sought to use federal money to purchase motor buses to transport commuters from outlying suburbs to the city tor employment purposes. When I raised a question regarding the need to equip the cuses with lifts so that physically disabled commuters could benefit from the service I was told tney could take a dial-a-rice service to the train station and then take the train to the city. Anyone who is familiar with dial-a-ride service knows of the Impossibility of such an arrangement, and besides, why shouldn ́t people with disabilities have the same right to ride the commuter bus as people without disabilities. We need a federal law to prevent this type of discrimination from happening. The third incident involves a woman who called me to inquire about getting a waiver so she would not have to make her day care center accessible. She claimea It wasn't necessary to provide access to the center because the state takes care of all the handicapped children, and besides a person with a disability could not possibly work in a day care center because of the need to change diapers and supervise playground activities. Well, I patiently explained the waiver process to her, and then tried to educate her to the importance of integrating children with disabilities with children without disabilities at an early age. I further explained, to no avail I might add, that if she tried to exclude handicapped children she might legitimately be charged with discrimination. I also told ner of my experience diapering and otherwise caring for my daughter, and even shared with her my wheelchair sports experience which would certainly assist me in supervising playground activities. I told her that I thought I would make a good day care worker, and wouldn ́t it be unfair to deny me the employment opportunity her center might offer. She seemed deaf to my words, and asked me to again explain the waiver process. I plead with you to move the ADA forward on the House agenda. It is desparately needed by the 36 million Americans who have disabilities and who need the additional protections such an Act offers. Mr. OWENS. Thank you. Mr. Oestreicher. STATEMENT OF MICHAEL OESTREICHER, DIRECTOR, CHALLENGES UNLIMITED Mr. OESTREICHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for this opportunity. I am the director of Challenges Unlimited, a nonprofit architectural firm that designs barrier-free environments and specializes in creating adapted recreation areas. Seventy-five percent of our staff is disabled. I will address my remarks to the need for a barrier-free environment and why the ADA is so important to that goal. One of our services is to provide consulting to professional design firms on accessibility issues. In the last 4 months, with the passing of the Civil Rights Restoration Act and the fair housing bill, we have received calls from 26 architects or landscape architectural firms, about 20 more than our average for an average 4-month period. Of these 26 calls, only 2 firms were interested in learning more about the laws and how they could implement them in a positive way. The other 24 firms only wanted to know how they could get around the rules or how they could get a variance. Mr. OWENS. They were willing to pay quite a bit for that. Mr. OESTREICHER. They were willing to pay almost anything for that. To a firm, they all said something like, "We think the laws are good. Those people need that help, but this project is different. If I have to do all this access stuff, it will kill my budget." Now, these are educated, articulate people. Most of them read the New York Times and watch public TV, and, yet, they seem to be totally ignorant and insensitive to over 35 million human beings. To make this situation worse, these professional designers are 100 percent dead wrong. If accessibility is part of the planning from the onset of a project, then that access costs no more or at the most marginally more than a project with no access. It is obvious that a clear message must be sent to the people who design our environment that no access or bad access will not be tolerated. Furthermore, strong, specific enforceable legislation must be enacted to aid these designers to create true barrier-free environments. The enactment of the Civil Rights Restoration Act and the fair housing law is a good start. The Americans With Disabilities Act will be a welcome addition. It must be noted that all of the provisions of the ADA need a strong barrier-free environment to work. It is important that in addition to legislation, we must also inform and educate the ablebodied community of the reason for the legislation. During a late-night planning session for beach accessibility for a local community, a very tired and frustrated member of our group said, "You know, sometimes I almost wish a person would hate me for being disabled. Then at least I would know they knew I was alive." This is a major key, for generally speaking, unless an able-bodied person has the privilege of working with, playing with, loving, or simply knowing a disabled person, the sad truth is they seldom ever think about them. We must awaken the consciousness and social responsibility of the able-bodied community. And one positive way is through this type of legislation. Mr. Chairman, I have the distinct privilege and honor of working 6 days a week with a group of people that are labeled "handicapped" and "disabled." Mr. Chairman, let me assure you that they are neither. They are creative, intelligent, sensitive and have more common sense than many able-bodied people I know. In closing, I would like to make one additional point. When our group designs barrier-free environments, you know what? It is not really that difficult. We are not doing brain surgery or nuclear fission or something like finding affordable parking in Boston. With good common sense, solid design precepts, and most importantly, strong input from the disabled people, we can create barrier-free environments. Thank you. Mr. OWENS. Thank you. Mr. St. Laurent. STATEMENT OF ROBERT ST. LAURENT, WORCESTER, MA Mr. ST. LAURENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Robert St. Laurent. I live in Worcester, MA. Most of the handicapped individuals in the city have decided, "Let's fight and let's get things together." I gave a piece of evidence to you in regard to discrimination on transportation, discrimination in equal housing, also discrimination of the Handicap Affairs Office, who does nothing for the disabled in the city of Worcester. You cannot be elected to an appointed position and be nothing but a rubberstamp. The disabled community is up in arms because of transportation, housing, hospitals' bathrooms not accessible to even take a shower, as a patient. When they are told as individuals, "Well, you are only going to be here for a short stay. You will be out in a few days." Or if you have no feeling, they do major surgery in your room. That is wrong. I think we have got to start educating the system. There are people out there who need the education. Mr. Chairman, many of us who are in wheelchairs cannot even go to a funeral parlor and not only that, cannot even go to a church of our denomination. Equal rights to all, not to a certain few. Thank you for much for letting me testify. [The prepared statement of Robert St. Laurent follows:] PREPARED Statement of Robert ST. LAURENT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I am Robert St. Laurent, 7A Sever St., approximately age 50 years, disabled 17 years, testifying here today in regards to discrimination in the city of Worcester. I sit on the Worcester Regional Transit Authority Advisory Board and have done so for the past 7 years-trying to bring about accessible transportation throughout the whole city for the disabled. We have requested main route accessibility for the past 7 years we have gotten nowhere with the Worcester Regional Transit Authority. The excuse they use is they don't know how many disabled need the service; they have refused to even try to complete a survey in the city of Worcester. We also have a local Handicapped Affairs Office in the city of Worcester and some of the issues that we have been bringing to the Executive Director of the office are-curb cuts, lighting for the disabled; lines in roads and side |