EDITORIAL: Balance of disabled rights and reason

PRESS-ENTERPRISE EDITORIAL
Published: Jan. 20, 2016 Updated: 8:23 p.m.

The Golden State has another chance to rein in lawsuit abuse. On Tuesday, the Assembly’s Judiciary Committee approved Senate Bill 269, a substantive reform meant to encourage small business owners to bring their businesses into compliance with disability accessibility law while protecting those proactive about doing so from frivolous lawsuits.

Introduced by Sen. Richard Roth, D-Riverside, the bill is virtually identical to last year’s Senate Bill 251, which overwhelmingly passed the Legislature before being inexplicably vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown, who objected to the inclusion of tax credits to help offset the cost of making properties more accessible.

California has unfortunately been a hotbed of lawsuit abuse, particularly with respect to the well-intended Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Meant to protect and enhance accessibility for those with disabilities, as implemented in California the law has been turned into a money-maker for serial plaintiffs.

Under current state law, any violation of disability access laws, even minor, harmless, technical violations like the exact wording of parking signs, is considered a violation of civil rights law. This makes it easy for plaintiffs who often prey on immigrant- and minority-owned businesses to make big money on the most trivial of errors.

Meanwhile, accessibility has suffered from a lack of outreach by policymakers to help educate property owners about the importance of bringing properties into compliance with the ADA.

Mr. Roth’s proposal strikes a useful balance. It empowers small business owners to correct technical violations within 15 days of being notified without threat of a lawsuit. It also gives small businesses a period of protection from liability if construction-related violations are identified and that business seeks an inspection from a Certified Access Specialist.

To accommodate the objections of some in the disability community and Mr. Brown, the latest iteration of the proposal reduces the definition of a small business from a business with up to 100 employees to a business with up to 50 employees and strikes the tax credits from the bill.

While the California Chamber of Commerce considers the bill a job creator, and SB269 is backed by organizations like the Consumer Attorneys of California and the Civil Justice Association of California, not everyone is happy. At Tuesday’s hearing, representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union and Disability Rights California condemned the proposal, arguing it still puts the disabled at a disadvantage.

As we see it, the only people the proposal disadvantages are serial plaintiffs who use the cover of disability and civil rights law to line their pockets.