Hello. Please sign in!

This document, portion of document or clip from legal proceedings may not represent all of the facts, documents, opinions, judgments or other information that is pertinent to this case. The entire case, including all court records, expert reports, etc. should be reviewed together and a qualified attorney consulted before any interpretation is made about how to apply this information to any specific circumstances.

i) Grievance Procedures

85. Kirola alleges that the City's ADA grievance procedures violate Title Il's program access requirements on the ground that the City's "written complaint policies and forms make no requirement that disability access barriers be removed within any particular time period, but instead permit the City to take up to two years to remove barriers[.]" Dkt. 662, 14:4-6; Dkt. 672, 25:6-9.

86. Kirola lacks standing to challenge the City's grievance procedure.22 At trial, Kirola testified to having made a single request for the removal of an access barrier; namely, her July 2006 request that the City install curb ramps at the corner of Hayes and Fillmore. RT 1383:19-1384:8, 1391:18-1392:2. The requested curb ramps were installed in April 2008, less than two years after the requests were made. RT 1384:7-8. There also is no evidence in the trial record that Kirola was unable to traverse the intersection or that she was compelled to take a substantially longer alternative route. To the extent that Kirola is complaining about the length of time it took for the City to install the curb ramps, she has presented no evidence to substantiate any injury resulting from such delay or that such delay is attributable to an ineffective grievance procedure.

 

22. As will be discussed below, even if Kirola had standing, there is no private right of action to challenge an ADA grievance procedure

[MORE INFO...]

*You must sign in to view [MORE INFO...]