Thought you all might be interested.....

-----Original Message-----
 US top court won't review sidewalk disability
case-OT


US top court won't review sidewalk disability case

By James Vicini

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court let stand Friday a ruling that
Sacramento must make all public sidewalks accessible to disabled Americans
under
a
federal anti-discrimination law.

Without any comment, the high court rejected an appeal by Sacramento, which
had asked the court to overturn a ruling that city sidewalks were covered by
the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and therefore have to be
accessible.

Sacramento argued the ruling by a U.S. appeals court in California imposed a
"staggering" financial burden on thousands of state and local governments.

The Justice Department urged the high court to reject the city's appeal,
arguing that the law covered public sidewalks.

The case stemmed from a class-action lawsuit against the city by
wheelchair-bound and vision-impaired citizens. They cited the disability law
and
the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which authorizes funding of certain services for
the
disabled.

The lawsuit said the city was required to alter and even rebuild its
sidewalks to widen them. It also asked that the city remove such obstacles
as
benches,
fire hydrants,  newspaper racks, mailboxes, trees and utility, traffic
signal
and telephone poles.

The lawsuit asked the city to get rid of roots and other protruding objects
and to make sure sidewalks were level.

A federal judge sided with the city. But the appeals court disagreed and
ruled sidewalks were clearly covered by the law.

If sidewalks qualified as a public program, activity or service, then roads,
bridges, buildings and other forms of physical infrastructure owned by state
or municipal governments would be covered too, the city's lawyers said.

A number of cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National League of
Cities supported Sacramento's appeal, saying huge amounts of money would
have
to be spent on construction and alterations.

The Justice Department said the cost issue may be addressed in further
hearings.

Department lawyers said the appeals court held the city may present evidence
in hearings before the federal judge that modifying its sidewalks would
subject it to "undue financial and administrative burdens" so that it would
be
exempt under the law.

06/27/03 10:46 ET

Copyright 2003 Reuters Limited.  All rights reserved.  Republication or
redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is
expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.  Reuters
shall
not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions
taken
in reliance thereon.  All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.