Transparency over local government meeting agendas, minutes, videos, etc. is being damaged by ADA compliance lawsuits

Local governments like cities are being sued because their websites are not completely designed to comply with ADA requirements that were written before the internet was created.  For instance, cities cannot post meeting videos if they don't incur the expense to provide captions that software for the blind or deaf can read and translate so they can understand it using specialized software that apparently cannot handle common file types like pdf's. (or older versions).  

 

Read this Orlando Sentinel Jan. 5, 2018 article and see how legal actions are harming local government transparency. There should be a grandfather clause, or a period like one year to comply due to the expense.  No one plaintiff or law firm should be allowed to file more that one lawsuit on this subject. 

 

Taxpayer transparency over local government is being damaged by ADA lawsuits, forcing cities and agencies to pull pdf copies of agendas, etc. from websites to satisfy lawsuits by blind and deaf citizens. This is political correctness run amok. I know last year Mt. Dora stopped providing Facebook live videos of meetings due to this ADA lawsuit risk, thus NO citizen has access to meeting videos anymore. I have been told by at least one other city that is why they won't do videos of meetings. However, I do know that YouTube automatically creates captions for their videos and that means the agencies could switch to YouTube Live for videos.

 

Additionally, I know that the Lake County Water Authority had to budget unexpected funds to change their website.  

 

This is nothing but greedy people who are trying to make quick bucks or trying to make a point without reasonable settlements.  You can tell because they demand cash settlements, and do not give the defendant organization a reasonable time to correct the issue. 

 

Back in the 1990's, I lived in lawsuit capital California and the state had rules for how safety posters must be displayed on walls for employees.   A law firm was engaging people who walked into various businesses like auto repair shops, took pictures of non-compliant bulletin boards and used the State law to sue them, generating settlements of $10-20k from each business.  It became such a huge problem that radio stations were covering the issue daily, and that is a major reason why Democrat Gray Davis, who supported the attorneys and lawsuits, was recalled and replaced by Arnold Schwarzenegger.  

 

HERE is a software firm who lists how to design websites to avoid ADA Compliance lawsuits, and they talk about how the ADA rules only affect government websites, but lawyers trying to generate settlements are using them to sue businesses.  They list 22 onerous, costly changes needed to make a site "ADA compliant" such as:

• Rule 8 – Do all video files on your website have audio descriptions of what is being displayed to provide access to visually conveyed information for people who are blind or have low vision?
• Rule 9 – Do all video files on your website have written captions of spoken communication synchronized with the action to provide access to people who are deaf or hard of hearing? (This kills the ability to provide streaming videos of government meetings).
• Rule 10 – Do all audio files on your website have written captions of spoken communication synchronized with the action to provide access to people who are deaf or hard of hearing?

And, here is a larger example of a firm offering services to prevent ADA lawsuits - the legal vultures are playing both sides of the issue.  Yes, lawyers (mostly Democrats, in my opinion) write these laws with many "shall" statements and purposely make them vague or excessively costly, thus generating lifetime revenues for the legal compliance vultures.  

 

Schools are also being sued for ADA "website accessibility" compliance.  As this article says, one woman filed 1700 lawsuits and "While most web accessibility cases we hear affect businesses, school systems from K-1 to Higher Ed are also seeing a dramatic increase in actions. These cases are somewhat different as they're coming from The Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights."  

 

In my opinion: 

 

California legislators and US Congress members need to act to modify the laws or agency written guides and rules to allow grandfathering of older info as is, and a reasonable time to implement new procedures.   This should not be a cash cow for attorneys and a few plaintiffs.  When you read in the article that one guy filed 200 lawsuits, you know the old ADA rules are being used as fiscal clubs to generate fees and awards. 

 

Vance Jochim